Petrik v. New Hampshire Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 04 June 1981 |
| Docket Number | 57179,Nos. 57176,s. 57176 |
| Citation | 400 So.2d 8 |
| Parties | John PETRIK and Claudine Petrik, husband and wife, Petitioners, v. NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Foreign Corporation, Superior Dairies, Inc., a corporation, Richard Williams, Irving T. Charles, Automobile Club of Southern California, a Foreign Corporation, and David Petrik, Respondents. Richard WILLIAMS, Superior Dairies, Inc., and New Hampshire Insurance Company Petitioners, v. John PETRIK and Claudine Petrik, husband and wife, Respondents. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Robert C. Gobelman and Jack W. Shaw, Jr. of Mathews, Osborne, Ehrlich, McNatt, Gobelman and Cobb, Jacksonville, for petitioners/respondents.
Carle A. Felton, Jr. of Boyd, Jenerette, Leemis & Staas, Jacksonville, for respondents/petitioners.
John and Claudine Petrik were passengers in their son David's automobile, driven by David, when it collided with a truck owned by Superior Dairies and driven by Irving Charles, Superior's employee. David's car was insured by Automobile Club of Southern California. The policy excluded coverage for "bodily injury to the named insured or a relative." The Petriks sued Superior Dairies and its insurer, New Hampshire Insurance Company, and Irving Charles. These defendants then filed a third-party complaint seeking contribution against David Petrik and his insurer, Automobile Club of Southern California. David's insurer denied coverage based on the family exclusion clause in its policy. The trial court granted summary judgment against David's insurer on the issue of coverage. On appeal, the insurance company sought reversal of the summary judgment, contending that its family exclusion clause was valid and that it was not responsible for the contribution claim against its insured. The district court Fla.App. 379 So.2d 1287, rejected this contention and, citing its prior decision in Florida Farm Bureau Insurance Co. v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 371 So.2d 166 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), it held that family exclusion clauses such as this one did not bar recovery of a third-party contribution claim against a joint tortfeasor's insurer. Pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution (1972), it certified the following question as being one of great public interest.
Does a family exclusion clause in an automobile insurance policy control over the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act to prevent one tortfeasor from seeking contribution from another tortfeasor?
Automobile Club of Southern California, the party adversely affected by the district court's resolution of this question, did not seek review of the district court's decision. Therefore, even though the district court has certified this question as being one of great public interest, we do not have jurisdiction because the certified question has...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tallahassee Furniture Co., Inc. v. Harrison
...386 So.2d at 1241. This court in Petrik v. New Hampshire Insurance Company, 379 So.2d 1287, 1289 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied, 400 So.2d 8 (Fla.1981), recognized the rule as explained in Clooney v. Geeting, 352 So.2d 1216 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977), that an employee's past driving record would......
-
Zabrani v. Cowart, 86-910
...Such a certification is not self-executing and requires an application for further review by the aggrieved party. Petrick v. New Hampshire Insurance Co., 400 So.2d 8 (Fla.1981). ...
-
Garcia v. Duffy
...negligent hiring and employment, see, e.g., Petrick v. New Hampshire Insurance Co., 379 So.2d 1287 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied, 400 So.2d 8 (Fla.1981); Abbott v. Payne, 457 So.2d 1156 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); see also, 379 So.2d 1287, or negligent hiring and retention. See, e.g., Texas Sc......
-
Brooks v. Sturiano, 85-2177
...under facts similar to those in this case. Petrik v. New Hampshire Insurance Co., 379 So.2d 1287 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied, 400 So.2d 8 (Fla.1981). The facts of this case show significant contacts between Florida and this insurance transaction. However, since this court in New Jerse......
-
Negligence cases
...employer and are thus proper causes of action. Petrik v. New Hampshire Ins. Co. , 379 So.2d 1287, 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied , 400 So.2d 8 (Fla. 1981), abrogation recognized on other grounds by State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Roach , 945 So.2d 1160 (Fla. 2006). Where a tort ha......