USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
SABRINA JONES AND CHERYL BLAKE, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF GLADYS ELOUISE BROWN-FIELDS, DECEASED, AND MILDRED GRANT, AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF MONICA A. GRANT, APPELLEES
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the appellant’s response to the Court’s order of October 27, 2006, the Court has determined that the order on appeal is not an appealable order. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(m) provides that “Judgments that determine the existence or nonexistence of insurance coverage in cases in which a claim has been made against an insured and coverage thereof is disputed by the insurer may be reviewed either by the method prescribed in this rule or that in rule 9.130.” Here, no claim has been made against the insureds. Therefore, on its face, the rule precludes review of the order on appeal and the Court lacks jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
KAHN, HAWKES, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Workmen's Auto Ins. Co. v. Franz, 24 So. 3d 638 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…in so-called “third party” claims where the coverage dispute involves liability coverage; it has no application to coverage disputes for “first party” claims for PIP, medical benefits, or uninsured motorist benefits. See USAA Cas. Ins. Co. v. Jones, 946 So. 2d 1127, 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). The fact that the order sought to be appealed does not fit within the category described in rule 9.110(m) does not mean that it cannot be appealed under another rule. We have reviewed rule 9.130 and conclude that the orde…
-
GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. v. Perez, 199 So. 3d 380 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…on appeal. Rule 9.110(m) provides for interlocutory appeals for third-party [*381] claims, and not for first-party claims seeking UM/UIM benefits. Workmen’s Auto Ins. Co. v. Franz, 24 So. 3d 638, 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); USAA Cas. Ins. Co. v. Jones, 946 So. 2d 1127, 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Appeal dismissed.…
-
Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Gaea J. Garrity, 23 So. 3d 237 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…dure 9.110(m). That provision requires an explicit ruling on coverage in a case in which a claim has been made against the insured. Here, the respondent’s claim was only asserted against the insurer, not the insured. See USAA Cas. Ins. Co. v. Jones, 946 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Petition denied.…