Palilla v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., X--187
| Decision Date | 29 October 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. X--187,X--187 |
| Citation | 322 So.2d 46 |
| Parties | Fred S. PALILLA, Appellant, v. ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Eugene Loftin, Jacksonville, for appellant.
John I. Todd, Jr., Jacksonville, for appellee.
This is an appeal from an order denying appellant's motion for rehearing of final judgment rendered in an action brought by appellee for interpleader and a cross-appeal by appellee.
Appellant was issued a policy of fire insurance by appellee for his dry cleaning business in Jacksonville. The policy provided for $45,000 coverage on the contents of appellant's Market Street property and $15,000 coverage on appellant's Justina Road property. (The policy also provided additional insurance on personal property of others with which we are not concerned on this appeal.) On February 13, 1972, while this policy was in effect, the Market Street property was partially damaged by fire and appellant filed a claim with appellee therefor. On February 26, 1972, the Market Street property had another fire which resulted in total loss of the property. Creditors of appellant also filed claims with appellee to proceeds of the policy. On December 8, 1972, appellee filed a complaint for interpleader requesting that the conflicting claims be determined in one proceeding. Appellant subsequently filed a counterclaim requesting that a judgment be entered for the losses sustained by him in each of the two fires and seeking reformation of the policy to reflect coverage of $62,500 for contents of the Market Street property rather than $45,000 as shown by the policy. On October 24, 1973, appellee deposited $75,000 in a savings account pursuant to order of the court which directed that said funds and interest accruing thereon be held in the account and that no disbursement be made except on order of the court. $45,000 of this $75,000 deposit was the face amount of the policy coverage on building contents.
By the final judgment and order on motion for rehearing, the trial court denied reformation of the policy thereby ruling that the insurance coverage on the contents was $45,000. The court further ruled that appellant was not entitled to recover an amount in excess of the face amount of the policy for both fires, and that appellant was not entitled to an award of interest on the face amount of the policy for the period prior to the aforesaid deposit of the $75,000. The court also made an award of attorney's fees to appellant.
Appellant contends that the court erred in (1) not reforming the policy; (2) in ruling that payment of the limits of the policy for the fire loss occurring on February 26 removed the liability of appellee for the fire loss which occurred on February 13 thereby limiting the recovery for the loss on both fires to the face amount of the policy; and (3) in not awarding appellant interest. Appellee, by its cross-appeal, contends that the trial court erred in ordering payment by it of attorney's fees for appellant in an interpleader action.
As to appellant's first contention that the court erred in not reforming the policy, we find no error. The burden was upon appellant to prove that by reason of fraud,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Getelman v. Levey
...Inc. v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 474 So.2d 396, 396-97, n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).6 But see Palilla v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co., 322 So.2d 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), cert. denied, 336 So.2d 603 (Fla.1976) (trial court did not err in declining to award prejudgment interest ......
-
O'BRYAN v. Columbia Ins. Group
...full policy limits are not reduced by the occurrence of covered loss during the policy period. See Palilla v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co., 322 So.2d 46, 48 (Fla. Dist. App. 1975) (in absence of loss clause, insurer held liable, at most, in case of successive losses by fire, for d......
-
Golden Door Jewelry Creations, Inc. v. Lloyds Underwriters
...in the past, that this is at best an instance of unilateral mistake. Finally, Defendants assert, citing Palilla v. St. Paul Fire Marine Ins. Co., 322 So.2d 46 (Fla 1st DCA 1975), that the party seeking reformation has the burden of proving the requisite elements by clear and convincing Spec......
-
Tiara Condo. Ass'n Inc v. Marsh & Mclennan Companies Inc
...insurance policy is presumed to provide aggregate coverage unless it expressly provides otherwise. See Palilla v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 322 So.2d 46, 48 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1975) (“The law is clear that in the absence of [a clause indicating that loss does not reduce the amount of t......