SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, APPELLANT,
v.
RANDALL SAPIENZA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Uninsured Motorist Provision cases and more on FLexlaw
LETTS, Judge.
Under an automobile liability policy for “garagekeepers” which did not provide for arbitration, the trial court ordered arbitration. We reverse.
This is the second time this case has been before us. On the first occasion, we held that although the policy contained no uninsured motorist provision, compliance with section 627.727, Florida Statutes (1987) was required. Sapienza v. Security Ins. Co. of Hartford, 543 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 557 So. 2d 867 (Fla.1989). Upon remand, the trial court ordered the parties to proceed to arbitration, and once again, we find reversible error. The policy in question does not contain an arbitration clause and, under the facts of this case, section 627.727 does not authorize arbitration.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Volusia Cnty. v. Aberdeen AT Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 2000)…ysis delves into whether an exercise of the power to revoke would be reasonable. However, “in determining the enforceability of [the declarations], [*134] the test is one of reasonableness.” Holiday Pines Property Owners Ass’n, Inc. v. Wetherington, 596 So. 2d 84, 87 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). While the power to revoke and the exercise of that power may frequently present two separate questions, the issues here are intertwined. The requirement of reasonableness necessarily involves some inquiry into the exercise o…
-
Klinow v. Island Court AT Boca W. Prop. Owners' Ass'n, Inc., 64 So. 3d 177 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…ed by competent, substantial evidence, while legal findings are reviewed de novo. Id. “In determining the enforceability of an amendment to restrictive covenants, the test is one of reasonableness.” Holiday Pines Prop. Owners Ass’n v. Wetherington, 596 So. 2d 84, 87 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). This court defined “reasonable” as “not arbitrary, capricious, or in bad faith.” Hollywood Towers Condo. Ass’n v. Hampton, 40 So. 3d 784, 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).2 In other words, as we stated in Holiday Pines, the modificat…
-
Zerquera v. Centennial Homeowners' Ass'n, Inc., 721 So. 2d 751 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…nts were amended. We conclude that the grantor exercised its right to amend the covenants in a reasonable manner. Thus, the amended covenants are valid and enforceable against Zer-quera. See Holiday Pines Property Owners Ass’n, Inc. v. Wetherington, 596 So. 2d 84, 87 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Zerquera also relies upon the doctrine of estoppel as a defense for his non-payment of the fines levied. “A party asserting estoppel must show that: (1) the party to be estopped made a representation of material fact and la…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sapienza v. Sec. Ins. Co. of Hartford, 543 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)