DOUGLAS K. GRIFFIN, APPELLANT,
v.
STONEWALL 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.
The court held that an insured's refusal to submit to a medical examination required by the policy constitutes a failure to perform a condition precedent, justifying summary judgment for the insurer.
The insured refused to submit to two requested medical examinations by the insurer and later provided a limited list of acceptable doctors. He then su…
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 Condition Precedent To Suit cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff Douglas K. Griffin was insured under an automobile liability policy by defendant Stonewall Insurance Company. He appeals a summary final judgment entered for the company upon a holding of the trial judge that the insurance company was entitled to a judgment as a matter of law because the insured had failed to perform a condition precedent to a suit upon the policy. Pursuant to Section 627.736(7)(a), Florida Statutes (1975), the policy includes a provision as follows:
“3.) . . . Such person [claimant] shall submit to mental or physical examinations at the Company’s expense when and as often as the Company may reasonably require and a copy of the medical report shall be forwarded to such person if requested.”
It appears without genuine issue of material fact that the plaintiff, on two separate occasions, refused to be examined by a physician procured by the insurance company. No reason or excuse for such refusal was furnished at the time, nor was any reasonable excuse advanced before the trial court. Subsequently, the plaintiff submitted to the insurance company a list of five doctors stating that he would only consent to be examined by one of those listed. Thereafter, he began the instant action to recover personal injury protection benefits under his policy. After the legislature has delineated public policy, the court has the duty to enforce it. Local No. 234 of United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of United States and Canada v. Henley and Beckwith, Inc., 66 So. 2d 818 (Fla.1953).
The trial judge properly entered summary judgment upon the grounds stated. Cf. Orozco v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 360 F.Supp. 223 (S.D.Fla.1972), affirmed 480 F. 2d 923 (5th Cir. 1973).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Custer Med. Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 62 So. 3d 1086 (Fla. 2010)…y established principles of law, resulting in a miscarriage of justice. On September 5, 2007, the district court issued an initial opinion that quashed the circuit court’s decision based solely on the authority of Griffin v. Stonewall Insurance Co., 346 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), and Goldman v. State Farm General Insurance Co., 660 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). In Griffin, the Third District considered the 1975 version of the PIP statute, which did not include the “unreasonable refusal ” provision, and…
-
Goldman v. State Farm Fire Gen. Ins. Co., 660 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)…o other types of examinations, such as independent medical examinations, Florida courts have held that the insured’s willful refusal to submit to such examinations constitutes a material breach which bars recovery. See Griffin v. Stonewall Ins. Co., 346 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); DeFerrari v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 613 So. 2d 101 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 620 So. 2d 760 (Fla.1993); Allstate Ins. Co. v. Graham, 541 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Tindall v. Allstate Ins. Co., 472 So. 2d 1291 (Fl…
-
Kelly v. State, 795 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…So. 2d 93 (Fla.1976); Holley v. Adams, 238 So. 2d 401 (Fla.1970); Ervin v. Collins, 85 So. 2d 852 (Fla.1956). Consequently, “[ajfter the legislature has delineated public policy, the court has the duty to enforce it.” Griffin v. Stonewall Ins. Co., 346 So. 2d 97, 98 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (citing Local No. 234 of United Ass’n of Journeymen & Apprentices of Plumbing & Pipefitting Indus. of United States & Canada v. Henley & Beckwith, Inc., 66 So. 2d 818 (Fla.1953)). The Act is a substantive law enacted to imple…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence