PAN AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
MARIA A. T. DE DOMINGUEZ, FORMERLY KNOWN AS MARIA DE LOS ANGELES DEL CORAZON, DE JESUS TRUJILLO MARTINEZ, 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.
Pan American Life Insurance Company's appeal of summary judgment in favor of the policyholder is affirmed, establishing that Dominican Republic confiscation decrees do not bar an insurance claim and that prior correspondence does not constitute policy cancellation.
Dominican Republic confiscation decrees do not bar an insurance claim, and prior correspondence does not constitute cancellation of an insurance policy.
[1] Dominican Republic confiscation decrees do not bar an insurance claim under Florida law.
[2] Prior correspondence between an insurer and policyholder does not constitute cancellation of an insurance policy.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePan American Life Insurance Company appealed a summary judgment entered in favor of Maria A. T. de Dominguez on an insurance policy dispute. The parti…
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 Insurance Policy Cancellation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant, Pan American Life Insurance Company, appeals a final summary judgment. The matter came before the court upon a “stipulation as to facts and documents.”1
Three points are presented on appeal, none of which urges that there was a factual issue to be determined. Therefore, the questions before us are whether the court applied the correct law and whether, under that law, the appellee was entitled to a final summary judgment. The law applicable to this case has been established by Pan-American Life Insurance Company v. Recio, Fla.App.1963, 154 So. 2d 197, certiorari quashed in Fla., 156 So. 2d 857, U.S. certiorari denied in 377 U.S. 990, 84 S.Ct. 1908, 12 L.Ed.2d 1044. See also Pan-American Life Insurance Company v. Blanco, 362 F. 2d 167 (5th Cir.1966).
Affirmed.
. “THIS CAUSE was heard upon the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court heard argument of counsel and received legal memoranda from each party. The parties filed a ‘Stipulation as to Facts and Documents’ in which all material facts and all pertinent documents, decrees and correspondence were stipulated. The Court finds that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that, as a matter of law, the Dominican Republic confiscation decrees do not bar Plaintiff’s claim and that Plaintiff’s letters to Defendant in 1962 do not constitute a cancellation of the policy sued upon. The Court further finds, as a matter of law, that Defendant’s breach of the subject policy occurred in 1969 and that the insurance policy, as stipulated to by the parties, was under seal.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Nat'l Trading, Inc. v. CAT CAY, Ltd., 154 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Pan-American Life Ins. Co. v. Inocencio Blanco, 362 F.2d 167 (5th Cir. 1966)
- Germano v. Kerner, 378 U.S. 560 (U.S. 1964)
- Beadle v. Scholle, 377 U.S. 990 (U.S. 1964)
- Pan-American Life Ins. Co. v. Recio, 377 U.S. 990 (U.S. 1964)
- McARTHUR v. State, 156 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1963)
- Riddle v. Joelson Concrete Pipe Co., 156 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1963)