STEVEN LUMBERT, APPELLANT,
v.
FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, ETC., APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 1999-03-26
No. 98-2560
Harris, J., Goshorn, J., Antoon, J.
728 So. 2d 826 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1999)

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.

Synopsis

The court reversed summary judgment against Lumbert on his third-party complaint against Safetitle, holding that improper joinder requires severance rather than summary judgment dismissal, leaving open the question of what claims remain after settlement with the principal.


Holding

Improper joinder of a third-party defendant requires severance rather than summary judgment dismissal.


Headnotes

[1] When a third-party defendant is improperly joined because the plaintiff seeks neither indemnification, subrogation, nor contribution, the proper remedy is severance under…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

Lumbert purchased property closed by Safetitle, which issued a title insurance policy on behalf of Fidelity. Title defects existed that Safetitle fail…

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.


Opinion of the Court
HARRIS, J.

HARRIS, J.

This appeal prompts more interesting questions about what is not raised than about what is. Lumbert purchased property closed by Safetitle which issued a title insurance policy on behalf of Fidelity. There were title defects not picked up by Safetitle which were insured by Fidelity. Fidelity sued Lumbert for a declaratory judgment determining its liability under the policy. Lumbert counterclaimed against Fidelity on the policy and filed a third-party complaint against Safetitle for its breach of fiduciary duty in not disclosing the true state of the title and for its negligence in failing to discover the title defects. In each count in his action against Safetitle, Lumbert alleged that Safetitle was acting within “the course of its duties” as an agent of Fidelity. Lumbert then settled his action with Fidelity.

Lumbert brings this appeal because the trial court granted summary judgment against him and in favor of Safetitle on the basis that Safetitle had been improperly joined as a third-party defendant because Lumbert was seeking neither indemnification, subrogation, nor contribution against Safetitle. Although Lumbert agrees that the joinder of Safetitle as a third-party defendant was improper, he urges that severance and not a summary judgment was the correct remedy. Although we are not sure what action Lumbert has remaining against the agent after settling with the principal, we agree that the summary judgment was in error. See Travelers Express, Inc. v. Acosta, 397 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

GOSHORN and ANTOON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw