EUGENE MOBLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
ALLSTATE 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.
Mobley seeks recovery under his uninsured motorist insurance clause for loss of consortium damages resulting from his wife's injury by an uninsured motorist. The court holds that loss of consortium damages are fully recoverable under an uninsured motorist clause and reverses the trial court's dismissal.
Damages for loss of consortium are fully recoverable under an uninsured motorist clause. The uninsured motorist clause substitutes the insured's carrier for the negligent uninsured motorist, so if that motorist would be liable, coverage exists under the clause.
[1] Damages for loss of consortium are recoverable under an uninsured motorist clause.
[2] An uninsured motorist clause effectively substitutes the insured's carrier for the negligent uninsured motorist.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“damages for loss of consortium are as fully recoverable under an uninsured motorist clause as any other type of damages”
Establishes the core holding that consortium damages are not categorically excluded from uninsured motorist coverage.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMobley's wife was injured by an uninsured motorist. Mobley filed suit against his insurer, Allstate, seeking a declaratory judgment and damages under …
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 Uninsured Motorist Coverage cases and more on FLexlaw
Mobley’s wife was injured by an uninsured motorist. Mobley seeks a judgment declaring Allstate, his insurer, liable to him under the uninsured motorist clause1 for damages for loss of consortium. In a second count, he seeks damages. Allstate’s motion to dismiss was granted because “there is no separate cause of action by the husband for the society, companionship, consortium, assistance and services of the wife under the uninsured motorist coverage afforded by the policy alleged in the complaint.”
Without reaching possible defenses to the action or treating as “fact” allegations embodied in the answer of Allstate or in its brief, we hold simply that damages for loss
*496of consortium are as fully recoverable under an uninsured motorist clause as any other type of damages. Our Supreme Court has made it clear that the clause effectively substitutes the insured’s carrier for the negligent uninsured motorist. If that motorist is liable, there is coverage under the clause.2
Dismissal at this stage was erroneous, and the order is thereupon
Reversed.
HOBSON and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Biondino v. S. Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co., 319 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)…y injury’’ sustained by the insured, caused by accident and arising out of the ownership maintenance or use of such uninsured automobile; . . . (Emphasis supplied) Appellant correctly points out that in Mobley v. Allstate Ins. Co., Fla.App.2d 1973, 276 So. 2d 495, this court interpreted similar language in the insuring clause of an uninsured motorist endorsement to include loss of consortium as an element of damage recoverable by an insured. Appellant further argues that her claim for loss of consortium mus…
-
Ky. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Mills, 367 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)…ction brought by its insured under his motorist coverage may raise any defenses which would be available to the uninsured tortfeasor and is as responsible for the damages award as would be the uninsured tort-feasor. Mobley v. Allstate Insurance Co., 276 So. 2d 495 (Fla.2d DCA 1973). However, there is no rule or reason to create such a. rule applicable to personal jurisdiction over a foreign insurer based only on jurisdiction over the uninsured tortfeasor. Appellant is correct in pointing out that the test for…
-
Alvaro Suarez v. Aguiar, 351 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…holding by an appellate court in Florida that punitive damages are recoverable under uninsured motorist coverage. It is argued that such a holding would be a logical development from the case law established in Mobley v. Allstate Insurance Company, 276 So. 2d 495 (Fla.2d DCA 1973); and Leatherby Insurance Company v. Willoughby, 315 So. 2d 553 (Fla.2d DCA 1975). The Mobley case held that damages for loss of consortium were recoverable under uninsured motorist coverage. The Leatherby case held that damages for…
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
- Mullis v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 252 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 1971)