State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Morris, MM-369
| Decision Date | 04 May 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. MM-369,MM-369 |
| Citation | 370 So.2d 828 |
| Parties | STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Foreign Corporation, Appellant, v. James Allen MORRIS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of James Harold Morris, Deceased, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
This cause is before us upon appellee's motion to dismiss appellant's review of a non-final order. Appellee sought damages on behalf of the estate of James Harold Morris for the wrongful death of the latter caused by the alleged negligence of one Jack Page, who, at the time of the accident, operated decedent's automobile with his apparent knowledge and consent. Both Page and State Farm were sued. It was alleged that State Farm had insured decedent's automobile and, upon the death of the decedent, the insured, the policy inured to the benefit of his estate. State Farm moved for summary judgment, contending that the policy was designed to protect the decedent from liability to third persons caused by the operation of his insured vehicle and was not intended to provide bodily injury coverage to the insured. 1 The motion for summary judgment was denied, the court holding that the exclusion had no application. The order also denied appellee's motion for summary judgment. The order concluded by stating that it did not decide whether or not either defendant Jack Page or State Farm might still raise affirmative defenses, assumption of the risk and comparative negligence.
Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(a)(C)(iv) permits review of non-final orders which determine the issue of liability in favor of the party seeking affirmative relief. The committee note to the rule states that it permits "appeals from interlocutory orders which determine liability in Favor of a claimant." (e.s.) No liability has been determined as yet in favor of the claimant. Both appellant's and appellee's motions for summary judgment were denied. While the court held that State Farm's exclusionary clause did not apply, it still made no ruling on an affirmative issue of liability. Such issues remain outstanding and are not ripe for review at this point. Appellee's motion to dismiss the interlocutory appeal is granted.
1 The policy excluded coverage "to any insured or any member of the family of an insured...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dauer v. Freed
...116 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (order denying defendant's motion for summary judgment not appealable); State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Morris, 370 So.2d 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) We next consider Freed's motion to dismiss the appeal taken by the defendants Maxwell Dauer and Reva B.......
-
Heritage Paper Co., Inc. v. Farah, AS-319
...which affirmatively determine the issue of liability in favor of a party seeking such relief. See State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Morris, 370 So.2d 828, 829 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) (order determining inapplicability of insurance policy exclusionary clause did not determine issue o......
-
U.S. Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. Sloan, AB-232
...review of orders which address the issue of insurance coverage without determining liability. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Morris, 370 So.2d 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). Although Fidelity Casualty Co. v. Scott, 386 So.2d 315 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), permitted interlocutory appeal o......