JILL BRIXIUS AND ROBERT A. BRIXIUS, HER SPOUSE, APPELLANTS,
v.
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Jill Brixius was injured as a passenger in her own insured vehicle driven by an uninsured friend. She sought uninsured motorist coverage under her Allstate policy, claiming the vehicle was uninsured because the policy excluded liability coverage for her injuries. The court affirmed summary judgment denying uninsured motorist coverage, holding that a vehicle cannot be both insured and uninsured under the same policy.
An insured is not entitled to uninsured motorist coverage where the liability portion of the same policy excludes coverage for injuries to the named insured. A vehicle cannot be both an insured and uninsured vehicle under the same policy.
[1] A vehicle cannot be both an insured and uninsured vehicle under the same policy for uninsured motorist coverage purposes.
[2] A valid exclusion in the liability portion of an insurance policy does not, by itself, render the vehicle uninsured for uninsured motorist coverage purposes.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a vehicle cannot be both an insured and uninsured vehicle under the same policy”
The core holding from Reid v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. that governs the case and is applied by the court to deny coverage.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Jill Brixius owned a motor vehicle insured by Allstate. While Brixius was a passenger in her own vehicle, it was driven by an uninsured frie…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Distinguishing Precedent cases and more on FLexlaw
LEHAN, Judge.
In this declaratory judgment suit plaintiff appeals from a summary judgment denying uninsured motorist coverage. Plaintiff was injured while a passenger in a motor vehicle which she owned, which was insured by appellee, and which was driven by an uninsured friend. On the theory that plaintiff was uninsured because the policy excluded liability coverage for injuries sustained by a named insured, plaintiff contends that she is entitled to uninsured motorist coverage under the same policy. In denying uninsured motorist coverage, the trial court applied a policy provision which provided that an uninsured auto is not a vehicle defined as an insured auto under the liability portion of the policy.
We affirm. Reid v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 352 So. 2d 1172 (Fla.1978).
As the parties appear to agree, Jernigan v. Progressive American Insurance Co., 501 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), would require a reversal in the case at hand. However, we decline to follow Jernigan and acknowledge our conflict with that case. We respectfully disagree with the apparent conclusion in Jernigan to the effect that Allstate Insurance Co. v. Boynton, 486 So. 2d 552 (Fla.1986), effectively overruled Reid under circumstances like those in this case by in effect defining a motor vehicle as uninsured for uninsured motorist coverage purposes if no insurance is available to the injured plaintiff. See 486 So. 2d at 555.
We do not necessarily disagree with the reasoning set forth in Jernigan which supports the position that Boynton should have overruled Reid in these circumstances. See Allstate Insurance Co. v. Dascoli, 497 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1986), which approves the reasoning of this court in Harrison v. Metropolitan Property & Liability Insurance Co., 475 So. 2d 1370 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). But Boynton specifically distinguishes, and in effect reaffirms, Reid in the following language:
Allstate, citing Reid v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 352 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 1977), asserts in its brief that a valid exclusion in a liability policy does not make a vehicle uninsured for uninsured motorist purposes. In Reid, we held that a vehicle cannot be both an insured and uninsured vehicle under the same policy. The present case is distinguishable because it involves separate policies. Reid is inapplicable.
486 So. 2d at 555 n. 5. That language, in our view, distinguishes Boynton from Jernigan and from the case at hand.
We find no merit in plaintiffs additional contention on appeal.
Affirméd.
CAMPBELL, C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brixius v. Allstate Ins. Co., 589 So. 2d 236 (Fla. 1991)…PER CURIAM. We have for review Brixius v. Allstate Insurance Co., 549 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1989), because of conflict with Jernigan v. Progressive American Insurance Co., 501 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 513 So. 2d 1062 (Fla.1987). We have jurisdiction, article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution, and appro…
-
Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. v. Kitteridge S. Fitzgibbon, 568 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…nce Co. v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 387 So. 2d 932 (Fla.1980); Reid v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 352 So. 2d 1172 (Fla.1977); Smith v. Valley Forge Insurance Co., 566 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Brixius v. Allstate Insurance Co., 549 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), jurisdiction accepted, 557 So. 2d 866 (Fla.1990); Allstate Insurance Co. v. Baker, 543 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 554 So. 2d 1167 (Fla.1989); Amica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Wells, 507 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); O…
-
The Travelers Ins. Cos. v. Chandler, 569 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…ot deny UM coverage to her). Compare Valiant Ins. Co. v. Webster, 567 So. 2d 408 (Fla.1990) (because son was not covered by father’s insurance policy for BIL, he was not entitled to claim UM coverage under that policy); Brixius v. Allstate Ins. Co., 549 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (plaintiff, who was injured while a passenger in a motor vehicle that she owned, which was driven by an uninsured friend, was not entitled to UM coverage, because the policy excluded BIL coverage for injuries sustained by the name…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Reid v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 352 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 1977)
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Boynton, 486 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1986)
- Reed v. State, 501 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Jernigan v. Progressive Am. Ins. Co., 501 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Harrison v. Metro. Prop. & Liab. Ins. Co., 475 So. 2d 1370 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Dascoli, 497 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1986)
- Reno v. Person, 497 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1986)