A. United Auto Rental, Inc. v. Bradley, 76-455
| Decision Date | 06 December 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-455,76-455 |
| Citation | 352 So.2d 579 |
| Parties | A. UNITED AUTO RENTAL, INC., and Insurance Company of North America, Appellants, v. Jeffrey BRADLEY and Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange, a Foreign Corporation, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Papy, DuVal, Poole & Usich, Coral Gables, Jeanne Heyward, Miami, for appellants.
Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Knight and Henry Burnett, Miami, for appellees.
Before PEARSON, HUBBART and KEHOE, JJ.
This is a dispute between insurance companies concerning which of them has the primary coverage and the right of an indemnity. The order appealed dismissed the cross-claim and third party complaint for indemnity filed by defendants A. United Auto Rental, Inc., and Insurance Company of North America against cross defendant Jeffrey Bradley and counter defendant Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange. The cross-claim and third party complaint claimed indemnity from Bradley and Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange upon the grounds that Bradley, as the driver of an automobile involved in an accident, was the wrongdoer and that he and Detroit, his insurer, had the primary responsibility for insurance coverage. Bradley had rented the car he was driving from A. United Auto Rental, Inc.
The rental agreement Bradley signed did not provide for a specific charge for insurance, but rather provided that if the driver had no insurance, he would be covered to the limits of liability specified in the Financial Responsibility Laws of the State of Florida. 1 It also provided that in the event Bradley did have insurance, the rental company's insurance would not cover him. The contract between A. United Auto Rental, Inc., and Insurance Company of North America provided that for bodily injury the rental company would be covered to the extent of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence.
A. United Auto Rental, Inc., and its insurance company claimed that in event of a verdict for the plaintiff they should be entitled to indemnity in the full amount of the judgment from Bradley and Detroit in the amount of its insurance. The trial court dismissed the claims for indemnity under the holding of this court in Executive Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Uditsky, 297 So.2d 340 (Fla.3d DCA 1974).
When this appeal was ready for oral argument, the appellants moved for a stay of further proceedings pending (1) the disposition of a petition for writ of certiorari pending in the Supreme Court of Florida (where jurisdiction had already been granted) in Diversified Services, Inc. v. Jackson, 330 So.2d 830 (Fla.3d DCA 1976), and (2) the disposition of a question certified to the Supreme Court of Florida pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 4.61 by the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, in Insurance Company of North America v. Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., 533 F.2d 310 (5th Cir. 1976). The opinions in these matters have now been filed by the Supreme...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
American Home Assur. Co. v. City of Opa Locka
...actually expended the sums involved and thus as the city's subrogee, was likewise entitled to recovery. A. United Auto Rental, Inc. v. Bradley, 352 So.2d 579 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Grange Ins. Ass'n. v. Great American Ins. Co., 89 Wash.2d 710, 575 P.2d 235, 239-240 (1978); cf. Atlantic Nationa......
-
Arkin v. Old Republic Ins. Co., s. 78-211
...of Insurance Company of North America v. Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., 348 So.2d 1149, 1154 (Fla.1977), and A. United Auto Rental, Inc. v. Bradley, 352 So.2d 579 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); see American Home Assurance Co. v. City of Opa Locka, 368 So.2d 416 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); but see State Farm Mu......