PAUL B. VALDEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
CUNA MUTUAL INSURANCE SOCIETY, A WISCONSIN CORPORATION, AUTHORIZED TO DO BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
Paul Valdez appeals a summary judgment entered after trial commenced but before evidence was presented. The case involves a group life insurance policy issued by CUNA Mutual that provided loan protection, and Valdez claimed disability benefits under the policy. The court reversed and remanded, finding that the trial court erred in denying Valdez's motion for voluntary dismissal and entering summary judgment.
The trial court erred in denying Valdez's motion for voluntary dismissal and entering summary judgment. The court should have granted the voluntary non-suit motion when new issues regarding the effect of loan satisfaction on the policy were first raised at trial, as these issues had not been framed in the original pleadings.
[1] A motion for voluntary dismissal should be granted when made before the court has ruled on the merits of the case.
[2] A trial court may err in denying a motion for voluntary dismissal, even if made after the jury has been impaneled but before evidence is presented.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“At the time the matter came on for trial and at the time the jury was impanelled, for the first time a new element was injected into the issues before the court.”
Establishes that the satisfaction of the loan raised new issues not previously framed in the pleadings
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCUNA Mutual issued a group life insurance contract to the Miami F.A.A. Credit Union providing death or disability coverage for loan protection. Valdez…
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 Permanent Total Disability cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, seeks review of an order granting the motion of the defendant for a summary judgment after a trial had commenced but before any evidence had been taken.
The appellee issued a group life insurance contract loan protection to the Miami F.A.A. Credit Union for death or disability in connection with various loans or credit transactions.1 The appellant borrowed money from the Credit Union, coming under the aforementioned insurance policy. On August 6, 1970, the appellant claims to have suffered a total and permanent disability. At that time, there was an outstanding balance due to the Credit Union. Thereafter, the appellee refused to pay off the loan pursuant to the policy. As a result, the appellant instituted the instant suit, seeking to recover under the policy.2 Issue was joined and the cause proceeded to trial. Immediately prior to the trial, the plaintiff satisfied the loan. Subsequent to impaneling and recessing the jury, but prior to taking any evidence, the appellee moved to dismiss for failure to join an indispensable party, the Credit Union. The appellant contended there was no outstanding loan balance; thus it wasn’t necessary to join the Credit Union. At this time, the question was first raised as to the effect of satisfaction of the loan on the policy. There was some confusion but it appears that the appellant moved for a voluntary dismissal without obtaining a ruling thereon. The appellee then moved for summary judgment and the trial court held the motion for voluntary dismissal untimely and entered the final judgment appealed.
At the time the matter came on for trial and at the time the jury was impanelled, for the first time a new element was injected into the issues before the court. The plaintiff, upon recognizing the difficulty in proceeding with the cause in light of the issues as framed by the pleadings, moved for a voluntary non-suit which should have been granted.
Therefore, the final judgment here under review be and the same is hereby reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to permit the plaintiff to file an amended complaint.
Reversed and remanded with directions.