BANKERS INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
CHRISTINA GRENKO, ROBERT S. ZEGRAY AND DAVID GLASS, APPELLEES
BANKERS INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
CHRISTINA GRENKO, ROBERT S. ZEGRAY AND DAVID GLASS, APPELLEES
707 So. 2d 1185
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1998)
Caution
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Bankers Insurance Company, seeks review of the trial court’s order granting appellee’s Motion to Vacate Order of Dismissal. No transcript of the hearing has been furnished to this court for review. We affirm.
Without a transcript of the July 10, 1997 hearing on the appellee’s motion, we cannot speculate on the trial court’s reasoning for its ruling. See Scott v. Seabreeze Pools, Inc., 300 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974). See also Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979).
AFFIRMED.
GLICKSTEIN, WARNER and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Taisyer Kattoum and Saadia Kattoum v. NEW Hampshire Indem. Co., 968 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…icy provides joint coverage rather than several coverage are materially distinguishable because of the context in which the words “any insured” were used in the policies at issue in those cases. For example, in USAA Casualty Insurance Co. v. Gordon, 707 So. 2d 1185, 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), the policy contained an exclusion section that stated that the company did not insure for, among other things, [*605] “Intentional Loss.” It defined intentional loss as “meaning any loss arising out of any act committed ..…
-
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Morgan, 870 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…could not be clouded by the definition of the phrase “insured auto” elsewhere in the policy. “An insurance policy is properly construed against the insurer only if the language of the policy is deemed to be ambiguous.” USAA Cas. Ins. Co. v. Gordon, 707 So. 2d 1185, 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (citations omitted). Because the language at issue here was not ambiguous, and because Morgan was not entitled to PIP benefits under that unambiguous language, we reverse the summary judgment in her favor and remand with di…
-
Baez v. Padron, 715 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…DCA 1991). Thus, in the absence of an adequate record of the proceedings below, we cannot resolve the issues raised in this appeal. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979); see also Bankers Ins. Co. v. Grenko, 707 So. 2d 1185, 1185 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Lederman v. Shore, 707 So. 2d 1134, 1135 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Rodwin-Pines v. Pines, 706 So. 2d 946, 946 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). Accordingly, we must affirm the final judgment entered pursuant to the jury’s verdict. Affirmed…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Scott v. Seabreeze Pools, Inc., 300 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)