First American Title Ins. Co., Inc. v. First Title Service Co. of Florida Keys, Inc.
| Decision Date | 21 December 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-431,82-431 |
| Parties | FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., a California corporation authorized to do business in Florida, Appellant, v. FIRST TITLE SERVICE COMPANY OF the FLORIDA KEYS, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Buck & Tatum and Thomas R. Tatum, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Turner, Fascell & Russo and S. Alan Stanley, Coral Gables, for appellee.
Before BARKDULL and SCHWARTZ, JJ., and KAPNER, LEWIS, Associate Judge.
The trial court dismissed a charge against an abstract company for negligent preparation of an abstract brought by one not in privity with the abstract company. A.R. Moyer, Inc. v. Graham, 285 So.2d 397 (Fla.1973); Sickler v. Indian River Abstract & Guaranty Co., 142 Fla. 528, 195 So. 195 (1940); Kovaleski v. Tallahassee Title Company, 363 So.2d 1156 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Chelsea Title & Guarantee Company v. Louis Briggs Construction, Inc., 315 So.2d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Williams v. Polgar, 391 Mich. 6, 215 N.W.2d 149 (1974).
We affirm and agree with the reasoning of the appellee that Sickler v. Indian River Abstract & Guaranty Co., supra, correctly states the rule of liability as to abstract companies in Florida today. The liability of an abstract company extends only to the parties who either contract with the company or are in privity with it and further that Sickler v. Indian River Abstract & Guaranty Co., supra, was not overruled by the Supreme Court in A.R. Moyer, Inc. v. Graham, supra, the decision by the 1st DCA in Kovaleski v. Tallahassee Title Company, supra, 1 to the contrary, notwithstanding.
Therefore the final order under review be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
While I do not believe that Sickler should be the law of Florida, I do agree that it was not overruled by Moyer. Under Hoffman v. Jones, 280 So.2d 431 (Fla.1973), therefore, I have no choice but to agree to affirmance, secure in the knowledge that, since this conclusion is in certified direct conflict with Kovaleski, the issue will be resolved by the supreme court, which alone has the authority to do so.
1 We realize that this opinion is in direct conflict with Kovaleski v. Tallahassee Title Company, supra, and hereby certify as to such conflict in accordance with Art. 5, Sec. 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution as amended in 1980.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
First American Title Ins. Co., Inc. v. First Title Service Co. of the Florida Keys Inc.
...is before the Court on petition for review of a district court of appeal decision reported as First American Title Insurance Co. v. First Title Service Co., 423 So.2d 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The district court properly followed established precedent, see Hoffman v. Jones, 280 So.2d 431 (Fla......
-
Abstract Corp. v. Fernandez Co.
...with Sickler v. Indian River Abstract & Guaranty Co., 142 Fla. 528, 195 So. 195 (1940), and First American Title Insurance Co. v. First Title Service Co., 423 So.2d 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), quashed, 457 So.2d 467 (Fla.1984). Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Respondent Fernandez Company was the defend......
-
Fernandez Co. v. Birtley, 82-1021
...consistent with this opinion. REVERSED AND REMANDED. COBB and SHARP, JJ., concur. 1 Contra First American Title Ins. Co. v. First Title Service Co., 423 So.2d 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); see generally Annot., 34 A.L.R.3d 1122 ...
-
First American Title Ins. Co., Inc. v. First Title Service Co. of the Florida Keys, Inc., 82-431
...for appellant. Turner, Fascell & Russo, Coral Gables, for appellee. ORDER WHEREAS, the judgment of this court was entered on December 21, 1982 (423 So.2d 600) affirming the judgment of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; WHEREAS, on review of this court's j......