New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. Knowles

Decision Date22 May 1957
Citation95 So.2d 413
PartiesNEW AMSTERDAM CASUALTY COMPANY, a Maryland Corporation, Appellant, v. Julius N. KNOWLES and Laura D. Knowles, his wife, Appellees.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

A. Frank O'Kelley and Chas. H. Spitz of Keen, O'Kelley & Spitz, Tallahassee, for appellant.

John C. Ausley of Ausley & Ausley, Tallahassee, for appellees.

THOMAS, Justice.

New Amsterdam Casualty Company of Maryland issued to Laura and J. N. Knowles, doing business as Oak Grove Convalescent Home, a liability insurance policy obligating the company to pay on behalf of the insured certain sums for which the policy holder might become liable. In the insurance contract was a provision that no responsibility was assumed by the insurer for claims 'resulting from the rendering of any professional services or omission thereof.'

We are principally concerned with the construction of the quoted exclusion clause in the light of the facts appearing in the record, but other pertinent conditions of the policy will be stated as we discuss the point of law to be resolved.

The appellees sought a declaratory decree establishing their right to have the appellant provide a defense in an action brought against then by the wife and next friend of William Grimmig, Jr., a mental and physical incompetent, a paralytic, who had been placed in appellees' convalescent home for nursing and care. According to the complaint in that case William Grimmig, Jr. suffered serious injuries by reason of the negligence of an incompetent attendant in the service of the appellees while the attendant was engaged in the performance of his duties.

In the complaint filed in the present suit it was alleged that appellees had no direct knowledge of any defect in the bed occupied by the invalid and knew of no reason why he had fallen from it. From their investigation of the incident they learned that the attendant while 'making his early morning rounds' found the bed bars down and the invalid on the floor. The appellees averred that the injury resulted from an accident and that under the policy the insurer was bound to defend them in the suit brought on behalf of William Grimmig, Jr.

By the denial of any responsibility for the defense of the appellees, the clear-cut question whether or not the services being furnished to Grimmig by the appellees were from their nature 'professional' is presented.

The chancellor concluded that the appellant was obligated to defend the appellees in the action brought against them and this appeal followed.

When the policy was issued to Oak Grove Nursing Home the insurer should have become aware of the nature of the enterprise in which the appellees were engaged. Under the contract for which, of course, the insurance company was compensated, an obligation arose to defend suits against the policy holder for damages resulting from 'bodily injury, sickness, or disease * * *.'

It is true that the appellant was privileged by the contract to make investigations in connection with any liability that might be claimed against it, but we do not find provisions in the contract or allegations in the pleading that justify the position, presumably taken after investigation, that what happened to Grimmig in the nursing home...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • Creative Hospitality Ventures v. U.S. Liability
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida
    • September 30, 2009
    ...be groundless and, therefore, no liability within the policy provisions defining coverage is held to exist. See New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Knowles, 95 So.2d 413 (Fla.1957). In applying these rules, where the allegations in the complaint leave any doubt regarding the duty to defend, court......
  • Baron Oil Co. v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., AR-437
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 12, 1985
    ...in the complaint. E.g., National Union Fire Insurance Co. v. Lenox Liquors, Inc., 358 So.2d 533 (Fla.1978); New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Knowles, 95 So.2d 413 (Fla.1957); State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Universal Atlas Cement Co., 406 So.2d 1184 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Kings Poi......
  • Burton v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • September 11, 1964
    ...declaration, or other statement of the cause of action, filed in such action against the insured. See New Amsterdam Casualty Company v. Knowles, Fla.1957, 95 So.2d 413, and the annotation in 50 A.L.R.2d 465, page 504." Bennett v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., Fla.Ct. App.1961, 132 So.2d See the ......
  • Szczeklik v. Markel Int'l Ins. Co., Case No. 8:12–CV–970–T–27TGW.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • April 30, 2013
    ...tenuous, at best, given that an insurance company is presumed to know the nature of an insured's business. See New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. Knowles, 95 So.2d 413, 414 (Fla.1957) (“When the policy was issued ... the insurer should have become aware of the nature of the enterprise in which the [......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT