BRITAMCO UNDERWRITER'S, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
ZUMA CORPORATION, ETC., ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
Britamco Underwriters challenged a summary judgment finding insurance coverage for injuries sustained in a bar patron assault. The court reversed, holding that an assault and battery exclusion in the insurance policy clearly excluded coverage for the patron's negligence-based claim arising from the incident.
The court held that the assault and battery exclusion clause clearly excluded coverage for the patron's claim, regardless of whether the legal theory was framed as negligence rather than assault and battery, because the claim arose out of an assault and battery.
[1] An "assault and battery" exclusion in an insurance policy bars coverage for claims arising out of an assault and battery, regardless of the legal theory upon which the un…
[2] An insurance policy exclusion for "assault and battery" applies to claims arising from injuries inflicted by patrons on other patrons.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“it is understood and agreed that this policy excludes claims arising out of: 1. Assault & Battery, whether caused by or at the instructions of, or at the direction of, the insured, his employees, patrons or any causes whatsoever”
The exclusion clause language that the court interpreted to bar coverage for the negligence claim
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA patron was injured in a beating at a bar operated by Zuma Corporation. The patron obtained a judgment against Zuma based on negligence for failing t…
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 Assault And Battery Exclusion cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, Judge.
Appellant seeks review of a summary final judgment finding insurance coverage in favor of appellee, Zuma Corporation. Appellee owns and operates a bar in which a patron was injured as a result of a beating inflicted by other patrons. The patron previously had obtained a judgment against the appellee based on the theory that, by failing to provide adequate security, appel-lee had negligently created a dangerous condition which resulted in the injuries to the patron.
The appellant, Britamco, which issued a policy of insurance to appellee, asserts that its policy contained no coverage for this incident because of the “assault and battery/negligent hiring” exclusion. This exclusion provided in pertinent part:
[I]t is understood and agreed that this policy excludes claims arising out of:
1. Assault & Battery, whether caused by or at the instructions of, or at the direction of, the insured, his employees, patrons or any causes whatsoever ...
Appellee concedes that the patron was injured by an assault and battery but contends that coverage is nevertheless available because the legal theory upon which the patron obtained a judgment was negligence in failing to provide adequate security. We agree with the appellant that the policy excludes coverage for this claim, which clearly arises out of an assault and battery. Our conclusion is consistent with the overwhelming weight of authority in jurisdictions that have considered this issue. E.g., Terra Nova Ins. Co., Ltd. v. North Carolina Ted, Inc., 715 F.Supp. 688 (E.D.Pa.1989); Garrison v. Fielding Reinsurance, Inc., 765 S.W. 2d 536 (Tex.App.1989); Ross v. City of Minneapolis, 408 N.W. 2d 910 (Minn.App.1987).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court with instructions that a summary final judgment be entered in favor of appellant.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
COWART and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Miami Beach Ent., Inc. v. First Oak Brook Corp. Syndicate, 682 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)…omplaint was couched in terms of the bar owner’s negligence in failing to keep control over its patrons, for purposes of determining insurance coverage, the injuries arose from the assault and battery. See Britamco Underwriter’s, Inc. v. Zuma Corp., 576 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)(bar whose customer recovered judgment against bar owner for negligence was not entitled to coverage by insurer when customer’s claim arose from assault and battery, and policy excluded coverage for assault and battery). Cf. Marr…
-
Perrine Food Retailers, Inc. v. Odyssey RE (London) Ltd., 721 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…c. v. First Oak Brook Corp. Syndicate, 682 So. 2d 161, 162 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (holding summary judgment based upon policy exclusion proper where claim based on negligence arose out of assault and battery); Britamco Underwriter’s, Inc. v. Zuma Corp., 576 So. 2d 965, 965 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) (finding that bar customer not entitled to coverage where claim arose from assault and battery; and policy excluded coverage for assault and battery). For these reasons, we conclude that the trial court correctly entered su…
-
Essex Ins. Co. v. BIG TOP OF Tampa, Inc., 53 So. 3d 1220 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)…y. See Perrine Food Retailers, Inc. v. Odyssey Re (London) Ltd., 721 So. 2d 402, 404 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Miami Beach Entm’t, Inc. v. First Oak Brook Corp. Syndicate, 682 So. 2d 161, 162 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Britamco Underwriter’s, Inc. v. Zuma Corp., 576 So. 2d 965, 965 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). Here, all three of the claims of negligence against Big Top arise out of the alleged battery committed by Davis. More specifically, the policy provision at issue here expressly excludes claims “arising out of ... any act or…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence