E. E. MILLS, INDIVIDUALLY AND E. E. MILLS, DOING BUSINESS AS MILLS AUCTION MARKET, PETITIONER,
v.
HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ABDALLAH KATIBA, AND C. E. MILLS, RESPONDENTS
E. E. MILLS, INDIVIDUALLY AND E. E. MILLS, DOING BUSINESS AS MILLS AUCTION MARKET, PETITIONER,
HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ABDALLAH KATIBA, AND C. E. MILLS, RESPONDENTS
179 So. 2d 346
Florida Supreme Court (1965)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
Upon the filing of the petition for certi-orari in this case there was an apparent conflict between the decision of the District Court of Appeal and decisions of this court and other District Courts of Appeal so the matter was set for argument on jurisdiction and merits.
After hearing the arguments for petitioner and respondents and making an intensive study of the record and briefs, we now conclude that no such conflict exists as to vest jurisdiction in this court under *347Sec. 4, Art. V of the Constitution, F.S.A., so the petition for certiorari is—
Denied.
THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Carlyle S. Fabal and Nancy G. Fabal v. Fla. Keys Mem'l Hosp., 452 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…tunity to evaluate its rights and liabilities, to make a timely investigation, to negotiate with claimants, and to prevent fraud and collusion upon it. Cf. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Mills, 171 So. 2d 190, 195 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. denied, 179 So. 2d 346 (Fla.1965) (rights of insurer). The insurer’s right to notice and an opportunity to defend a claim is a common feature in a contract of insurance, from which does not necessarily follow a right to be insulated from judgment by virtue of a statute of…
-
Quintana v. The Honorable Frederick N. Barad, 528 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…d. Thus, the insurer had an opportunity "to evaluate its rights and liability, ... to make a timely investigation, and to prevent fraud and imposition on it.” Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Mills, 171 So. 2d 190, 195 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. denied, 179 So. 2d 346 (Fla.1965); see Alabama Farm Bureau Mut. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Harris, 197 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967). . We note that where the Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund is concerned, a person filing a claim against a covered health provider must name the…
-
City Mgmt. Grp. Corp. v. Am. Reliance Ins. Co., 528 So. 2d 1299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…e Ideal Mut. Ins. Co. v. Waldrep, 400 So. 2d 782, 785-86 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Deese v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co., 205 So. 2d 328, 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967); Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Mills, 171 So. 2d 190, 195 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. denied, 179 So. 2d 346 (Fla.1965); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Ranson, 121 So. 2d 175, 182 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960); and (d) this being so, a summary judgment for the insurer herein was entirely proper. See Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966). Affirmed.…