AMERICAN FIDELITY FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
v.
FRANK HARTMAN, FORREST H. PELFREY AND NORMA JEAN PELFREY, HIS WIFE, RESPONDENTS
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.
The Florida Supreme Court quashed a decision of the District Court of Appeal, finding a direct conflict on a point of law with a prior ruling by the Supreme Court. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's precedent.
Yes, the decision of the District Court of Appeal directly conflicts with the point of law established in Lynch-Davidson Motors v. Griffin.
“We have here for review by conflict certiorari the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, dated July 13, 1965, in Hartman v. American Fidelity Fire Insurance Company, etc., 177 So. 2d 376.”
Establishes the procedural posture and the decision being reviewed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involves a dispute where the District Court of Appeal, Third District, issued a decision in July 1965. The Florida Supreme Court reviewed thi…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Conflict Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
We have here for review by conflict cer-tiorari the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, dated July 13, 1965, in Hartman v. American Fidelity Fire Insurance Company, etc., 177 So.2d 376. The *697history and background are set forth in the opinions of the District Court and it would serve no useful purpose to repeat them here. Jurisdiction attaches under Section 4(2), Article V, Constitution of Florida, F.S.A., because of a direct conflict on the same point of law with a decision of this court in Lynch-Davidson Motors v. Griffin, 182 So. 2d 7.
Oral argument having been heard and the court having examined the briefs and record, the decision of the District Court here under review is quashed under the authority of Lynch-Davidson Motors v. Griffin, 182 So.2d 7, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with that decision.
It is so ordered.
THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, DREW and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bankers & Shippers Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Phoenix Assurance Co. OF NEW York, 210 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 1968)…V, Sec. 4(2), Fla. Const., F.S.A., because of a direct conflict on the same point of law with the decisions of this court in Lynch-Davidson Motors v. Griffin, Fla.1966, 182 So. 2d 7, and American Fidelity Fire Insurance Company v. Hartman, Fla.1966, 185 So. 2d 696; the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Second District, in Ohio Casualty Co. v. Keller, Fla.App.1967, 199 So. 2d 343, and of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, in Financial Indemnity Company v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualt…1 / 3
-
The Hanover Ins. Co. v. Bramlitt, 228 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)…nce whatever is required to be carried under the laws of this State. Bankers & Shippers Ins. Co. of New York v. Phoenix Assurance Co., supra; Lynch-Davidson Motors v. Griffin, 182 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1966); American Fidelity Fire Insurance Co. v. Hartman, 185 So. 2d 696 (Fla.1966). [See Judge Swann’s dissenting opinion in the Hartman case, 177 So. 2d 376, in the District Court of Appeal before its reversal by the Supreme Court, supra.] When not required to be carried by law, a liability policy, if there be one, is…
-
Ohio Cas. Co. v. Keller, 199 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)…t of Appeal’s opinion in Hartman v. American Fidelity Fire Insurance Company, supra, the Supreme Court subsequently quashed that opinion and held that such endorsements were valid and enforceable. American Fidelity Fire Insurance Company v. Hartman, 185 So. 2d 696 (Fla.1966). We, therefore, reverse and remand for further action consistent with the law as set forth in American Fidelity Fire Insurance Company v. Hartman, 185 So. 2d 696 (Fla.1966). The second point raised by appellant is without merit because t…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lynch-Davidson Motors v. Griffin, 182 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1966)
- Hartman v. Am. Fid. Fire Ins. Co., 177 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)