ELIZABETH B. HAZOURI, APPELLANT,
v.
TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE
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 court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that the plaintiff was not totally disabled at the time she terminated her employment, thus precluding coverage under the policy.
Plaintiff sought insurance coverage for medical expenses incurred after terminating employment. She had been hospitalized for an emotional disturbance…
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 Termination Of Employment cases and more on FLexlaw
Elizabeth B. Hazouri sought a declaration that the Travelers Insurance Company was liable for medical expenses incurred by her after termination of her employment with the insurance company under “part EDMX — Major Medical Expense Benefits —Total Disability, Employees and their Dependents” of a group accident and sickness policy. The chancellor entered a final decree in favor of the insurance company.
Coverage under part EDMX is terminated when the employee’s employment is terminated unless such person is totally disabled at the date he ceases active work.
The evidence reveals that Mrs. Hazouri had been hospitalized from August 9, 1963, to August 11, 1963, due to an emotional disturbance. On August 12, 1963, she returned to her usual and regular employment with the insurance company in Miami on a full time 'basis. She continued working full time until she voluntarily terminated her employment on October 4, 1963. Mrs. Haz-ouri gave as her reason for resigning that she was going to Jacksonville to take care of her sick child. A short time after her arrival in Jacksonville she was hospitalized for approximately three weeks. She has *297Ea’d psychiatric- care, both in and out of the hospital, since that time.
Whether one is totally disabled depends upon the circumstances of the particular case and is ordinarily a question of fact.1
The evidence in this case is sufficient to warrant a finding that Mrs. Hazouri was not totally disabled at the time she terminated her employment.2
Therefore, the decree appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States v. Wiggins, 115 Fla. 136 (Fla. 1934)
- Nola B. Scott v. Gen. Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp., Ltd., 158 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)