Jean-Louis v. Praetorian Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 06 May 2020
• Docket Number: No. 3D19-1312,3D19-1312
• Citation: 305 So.3d 663 (Mem)
• Parties: Ritha JEAN-LOUIS, Appellant, v. PRAETORIAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

305 So.3d 663 (Mem)

Ritha JEAN-LOUIS, Appellant,

v.PRAETORIAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 3D19-1312

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 6, 2020.

Giasi Law, P.A., and Melissa A. Giasi and Erin M. Berger (Tampa), for appellant.

Garrison, Yount, Forte & Mulcahy, L.L.C., and George M. Duncan, Joseph W. Gelli, and Robert T. Vorhoff (Tampa), for appellee.

Before LOGUE, HENDON, and LOBREE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Orthopedic Specialists, 212 So. 3d 973, 975-76 (Fla. 2017) (quoting Washington Nat'l Ins. Corp. v. Ruderman, 117 So. 3d 943, 948 (Fla. 2013) ) ("Where the language in an insurance contract is plain and unambiguous, a court must interpret the policy in accordance with the plain meaning so as to give effect to the policy as written."); Ebanks v. Ebanks, 198 So. 3d 712, 715 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (quoting Gibney v. Pillifant, 32 So. 3d 784, 785 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) ) ("[T]he actual language used in the contract is the best evidence of the intent of the parties, and the plain meaning of that language controls."); Dingle v. Dellinger, 134 So. 3d 484, 488 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (A person is an intended third-party beneficiary to a contract "if the parties to the contract clearly express, or the contract itself expresses, an intent to primarily and directly benefit the third party or a class of persons to which that party claims to belong.").