Allstate Ins. Co. v. Korschun
| Decision Date | 13 September 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-1068,76-1068 |
| Citation | 350 So.2d 1081 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO., Appellant, v. Robert S. KORSCHUN, Appellee. |
Weinstein & Bavly and Arthur J. Morburger, Miami, for appellant.
Pozen & Gold, Miami, for appellee.
Before PEARSON, HAVERFIELD and HUBBART, JJ.
The plaintiff Allstate Insurance Company appeals from a final judgment in favor of its insured, the defendant Robert S. Korschun, in a suit for declaratory and injunctive relief, which judgment permits the defendant Korschun to proceed to arbitration on his uninsured motorist claim against Allstate. Allstate contends that the defendant Korschun is not entitled to arbitrate this claim for lack of coverage because Korschun did not report to the police the hit and run automobile accident giving rise to the claim within 24 hours after the accident in violation of an insurance policy provision requiring such notice.
The law is clear that a 24 hour notice requirement to the police or appropriate government authority is a valid provision and generally a condition precedent to obtaining uninsured motorist coverage in a hit and run automobile accident. The reason for such a requirement is to allow the police and other interested parties (such as the insurance company) an opportunity to investigate, search and possibly apprehend the hit and run driver, thus facilitating inquiry whether the hit and run vehicle was in fact uninsured and allowing the insurer to enforce its subrogation rights against a negligent uninsured hit and run motorist. McKay v. Highlands Insurance Co., 287 So.2d 393, 395 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). While prejudice to the insurer is presumed in the case of non-compliance with such a notice requirement, the insurer will not automatically be relieved of liability simply by showing that notice was not given within the time provided for in the policy if the insured can demonstrate that the insurer has not thereby been prejudiced. Laster v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., 293 So.2d 83, 86 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). See Tiedtke v. Fidelity and Casualty Co. of New York, 222 So.2d 206 (Fla.1969).
We reverse and remand for a new trial. The defendant Korschun did not report to the police the hit and run accident giving rise to his uninsured motorist claim within 24 hours of the accident and failed to establish in the trial court that the insurer Allstate was not prejudiced by the failure...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Donnell v. Industrial Fire & Cas. Ins. Co.
...(Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Torres v. Protective National Insurance Co. of Omaha, 358 So.2d 109 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Allstate Insurance Co. v. Korschun, 350 So.2d 1081 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), cert. denied, 359 So.2d 1216 Reversed and remanded for an adjudication on the issues of failure to cooperate an......
-
Girard v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
...So.2d 83 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1974); Barnes v. Travelers Insurance Co., 342 So.2d 1065 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1977); Allstate Insurance Co. v. Korschun, 350 So.2d 1081 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1977); Flamm v. Doe, 167 Ga.App. 587, 307 S.E.2d 105 (Ct.App.1983); Canty v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification ......
-
De Ferrari v. Government Employees Ins. Co.
...review denied, 392 So.2d 1381 (Fla.1980); Torres v. Protective Nat'l Ins. Co., 358 So.2d 109 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Allstate Ins. Co. v. Korschun, 350 So.2d 1081 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), cert. denied, 359 So.2d 1216 We conclude that prejudice is not at issue when an insurer's reasonable request for......
-
Brennan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
...83 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); Barnes v. Travelers Insurance Company, 342 So.2d 1065 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Compare: Allstate Insurance Company v. Korschun, 350 So.2d 1081 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). ...