ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
ROYAL GUARDIAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, AND JOHN PATTERSON YOUNG, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JAMES SEWELL SMITH, DECEASED, APPELLEES
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.
Allstate Insurance Company appealed an order granting a motion to abate filed by Royal Guardian Insurance Company of Canada for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court affirmed the abatement, finding no error in the trial court's dismissal based on the foreign insurer's lack of presence in Florida and lack of proper service of process.
The trial court did not err in granting the motion to abate. The order was presumed correct and affirmed. Additionally, even if Guardian had waived its jurisdictional defense and the court addressed the merits, no cause of action existed against Guardian under its liability coverage because the complaint failed to allege any basis upon which Smith had become legally obligated to pay damages.
[1] A court order granting a motion to abate for lack of jurisdiction over the person of a defendant is presumed correct and will be affirmed absent a demonstration of error.
[2] A liability insurance policy obligates the insurer to pay only sums that the insured is legally obligated to pay.
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“The obligation of Guardian Insurance Company of Canada under the liability coverage of its policy issued to its insured Smith is to pay only the sums which the insured is legally obligated to pay.”
Establishes the fundamental principle that an insurer's obligation under a liability policy is limited to amounts the insured is legally obligated to pay, which defeats Allstate's indemnification claim.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAllstate paid a judgment against its insured, National Car Rental Systems, Inc., for liability arising from an automobile accident involving driver Sm…
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 Abatement cases and more on FLexlaw
OWEN, Chief Judge.
Allstate Insurance Company paid a judgment against its insured, National Car Rental Systems, Inc.,1 for liability arising out of the ownership of an automobile operated by one Smith. Because the judgment which it paid was in excess of its policy limits, Allstate brought the present action against the estate of the deceased driver and his liability insurance carrier, seeking indemnification for the excess. This interlocutory appeal is from an order granting the defendants’ motions to abate for lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendants.
The only issue argued on appeal is that the court erred in granting the motion to abate filed by Guardian Insurance Company of Canada (erroneously designated in the complaint as Royal Guardian Insurance Company of Canada). That defendant’s motion to abate was on the grounds of “lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant in that the defendant is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Canada and is not doing business in the State of Florida,-'-and is not otherwise subject to service of process issued by this Court”. The order appealed simply states that “defendants’ motion to abate are granted”. Nothing in the appendix or the certified appeal papers demonstrate any error in granting this motion upon the grounds specified therein, and the order being presumed correct, is therefore affirmed.
Gratuitously, we add the following observation. Appellant tells us in its brief, unsupported by the record, that at hearing on the motion to abate counsel for Guardian abandoned the grounds set forth in the motion and argued only that the court did not have jurisdiction over Guardian Insurance Company of Canada because the court had not acquired proper jurisdiction over Guardian’s insured. Thus, (says appellant) the real issue on appeal is whether a suit may be maintained against Guardian under the liability coverage of its policy issued to its insured Smith where Smith cannot now be joined as a co-defendant and no judgment has been obtained against Smith, but his negligence was resolved in the prior case which resulted in the judgment against National Car Rental paid by Allstate.
While we do not see how this issue is before us on interlocutory appeal from the order granting a motion to abate, if it is the court reached the correct result. The obligation of Guardian Insurance Company of Canada under the liability coverage of its policy issued to its insured Smith is to pay only the sums which the insured is legally obligated to pay. Since the 'complaint does not allege any basis upon which Smith has become legally obligated to pay any damages, no cause of action is alleged against Guardian under its liability coverage for Smith.
Affirmed.
CROSS and MAGER, JJ., concur. . See, National Car Rental System, Inc. v. Holland, 269 So. 2d 497, (4th DCA Fla.1972).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Beane, 385 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…e legal obligations of the insured, the release of Aetna’s insured effectively extinguished Aetna’s liability. Russell v. Orange County, 237 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970) and Allstate Insurance Company v. Royal Guardian Insurance Company of Canada, 314 So. 2d 14 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). The flaw in the logic of appellant’s position is that the liability of the insured arises in the context of commission of a tort whereas the insurer’s liability arises by virtue of third-party beneficiary principles of contract…
-
Argos Res., Inc. v. Merritt, 446 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…erred in its ruling denying the motions to dismiss. See Castellanos v. Hialeah-Miami Springs First State Bank, 330 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 341 So. 2d 1080 (Fla.1976); Allstate Insurance Co. v. Royal Guardian Insurance Co. of Canada, 314 So. 2d 14 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). The record clearly demonstrates that the order appealed should be affirmed upon the grounds that the service was legally sufficient under both section 48.161, Florida Statutes (1981), see Cortez Development Co. v. New York Cap…