Jones v. Travelers Indem. Co. of Rhode Island
| Decision Date | 08 March 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 54269,54269 |
| Parties | Laura M. JONES, Petitioner, v. TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF RHODE ISLAND, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Robert V. Romani of Farish & Farish, West Palm Beach, for petitioner.
Edna L. Caruso, and Roy R. Watson, II, of Adams, Coogler, Watson & Smith, West Palm Beach, for respondent.
By petition for writ of certiorari, petitioner seeks review of a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, reported at 357 So.2d 231 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978), which is in conflict with State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Diem, 358 So.2d 39 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). 1 The issue here centers on the extent of uninsured motorist coverage for an insured when the policy limits of the uninsured motorist provisions of a policy equal the limits of the tort-feasor's liability policy but the insured settles for less than the tort-feasor's stated liability limits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution.
Petitioner's minor child died in an automobile accident on August 31, 1975. The tort-feasor's liability insurer provided coverage in the amount of $15,000 per person and $30,000 per occurrence. Petitioner settled her claim against the tort-feasor for $10,000 because of other competing claims. Petitioner also was covered by uninsured motorist insurance in the amount of $15,000 per person and $30,000 per occurrence.
Petitioner brought an action for declaratory relief against respondent/carrier for the $5,000 difference between what she collected from the tort-feasor and the limits of her uninsured motorist policy. In the alternative she sought the entire $15,000 uninsured motorist benefits because respondent had agreed that petitioner's damages exceeded $25,000. The District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, affirmed the grant of summary judgment to respondent, holding that uninsured motorist coverage becomes applicable only when the uninsured policy limits exceed the policy limits of the tort-feasor.
In Dewberry v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 363 So.2d 1077 (Fla.1978), we had occasion to construe section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes (1975), which reads in pertinent part that uninsured motorist coverage
shall be excess over but shall not duplicate the benefits Available to an insured under any workmen's compensation law, disability benefits law, or any similar law; under any automobile liability or automobile medical expense coverages; or from the owner or operator of the uninsured motor vehicle or any other person or organization jointly or severally liable together with such owner or operator for the accident.
363 So.2d at 1080 (emphasis supplied).
We held that where...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wolfe v. Sperling Agency, Inc.
...involving uninsured coverage, but stating that underinsured coverage would be treated similarly, and Jones v. Travelers Indem. Co. of Rhode Island, 368 So.2d 1289 (Fla.Sup.Ct.1979). In Hurley v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 438 So.2d 1002 (Fla.Ct.App.1983), it was held that where the unin......
-
Bruno v. Travelers Ins. Co., 79-1620
...fortiori situation in which he has actually received all of his assessed damages from the tortfeasor. See Jones v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Rhode Island, 368 So.2d 1289 (Fla.1979); Dewberry v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 363 So.2d 1077 (Fla.1978); State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Napoli, 380......
-
Kenilworth Ins. Co. v. Drake
...that any liability insurance carried by either or both of the tortfeasors must be credited against UMC. Jones v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Rhode Island, 368 So.2d 1289 (Fla.1979); Dickey v. Grange Mutual, 370 So.2d 1234 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). In the instant case, however, the difficult questi......
-
Michigan Millers Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bourke, s. 90-01401
...insurance coverage. See Dewberry v. Auto-Owner's Insurance Co., 363 So.2d 1077 (Fla.1978); see also Jones v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Rhode Island, 368 So.2d 1289 (Fla.1979) (insured entitled to "excess over" amount received from tortfeasor's carrier); Smith v. State Farm Mutual Automobil......