EXECUTIVE RENT-A-CAR, INC., AND CHICAGO INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
SHIRLEY UDITSKY AND RICHARD TARZIAN, ETC., ET AL., APPELLEES; EXECUTIVE RENT-A-CAR, INC., AND CHICAGO INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS, V. MEYER R. LEVINE AND RICHARD TARZIAN, ETC., ET AL., APPELLEES
EXECUTIVE RENT-A-CAR, INC., AND CHICAGO INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
SHIRLEY UDITSKY AND RICHARD TARZIAN, ETC., ET AL., APPELLEES; EXECUTIVE RENT-A-CAR, INC., AND CHICAGO INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS, V. MEYER R. LEVINE AND RICHARD TARZIAN, ETC., ET AL., APPELLEES
297 So. 2d 340
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1974)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See: Howard v. American Service Mutual Insurance Company, Fla.App.1963, 151 So. 2d 682; Bankers and Shippers Insurance Company of New York v. Phoenix Assurance Company of New York, Fla. 1968, 210 So. 2d 715; Roth v. Old Republic Insurance Company, Fla. 1972, 269 So. 2d 3; Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., Inc., Fla. 1973, 277 So. 2d 775; Rocky Mountain Fire & Casualty Company v. Allstate Insurance Company, 107 Ariz. 227, 485 P. 2d 552.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lehman-Eastern Auto Rentals, Inc. v. Brooks, 370 So. 2d 14 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…ter would be an insured under Lehman-Eastern’s policy only if the renter has no other valid and collectible automobile liability insurance. We must reject this argument based upon the authorities cited in Executive Rent-A-Car, [*16] Inc. v. Uditsky, 297 So. 2d 340 (Fla.3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 310 So. 2d 742 (Fla.1975) holding such clauses invalid. Pan American next argues that its liability is limited to $10,000, the minimum amount required under the Florida Financial Responsibility Law. We find this poi…
-
Diversified Servs., Inc. v. Jackson, 330 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)…ere also contrary to public policy and void; and (3) Diversified was not entitled to indemnity from Lopez for any amount. Diversified and Pan American conceded that under this court’s decision in Executive Rent-a-Car, Inc. v. Uditsky, Fla.App. 1974, 297 So. 2d 340, cert. denied, Fla., 310 So. 2d 742 the contingent insurance clause was invalid. However, as to arguments two and three above, they contended to the contrary. After the conclusion of the hearing, the trial judge entered final judgment which reads in…
-
Am. Bankers Ins. Co. OF Fla. & Olin's Miami Rent A Car, Inc. v. Leatherby Ins. Co. & Julio Gonzalez, 350 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)…iversified Services, Inc. v. Jackson, 330 So. 2d 830 (Fla.3d DCA 1976). As in the instant case, the driver’s policy contained the typical excess clause. The court first observed that in its previous decision of Executive Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Uditsky, 297 So. 2d 340 (Fla.3d DCA 1974), the contingent insurance clause had been ruled invalid. The court went on to say that because that clause was invalid, [*356] the limitation of coverage to the amount specified by the financial responsibility law was also invalid.…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Howard v. Am. Serv. Mut. Ins. Co., 151 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Roth v. OLD Republic Ins. Co. & N. River Ins. Co., 269 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 1972)
- Bankers & Shippers Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Phoenix Assurance Co. OF NEW York, 210 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 1968)
- The Hartford Accident & Indem. Co., Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., Inc., 277 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 1973)