From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bradley v. Govt. Employees Ins. Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Dec 18, 1984
460 So. 2d 981 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Summary

In Bradley, the third district held that, in deciding whether the plaintiff-appellant was entitled to uninsured motorist coverage, the court, not the arbitrators, was required to determine whether the uninsured motorist policy was applicable; the court "was empowered to make the threshold factual determination that the uninsured motorist was not solely responsible for the plaintiff's injuries and that the negligence of the insured motorist contributed to the accident as well."

Summary of this case from Allstate Ins. Co. v. Banaszak

Opinion

No. 84-209.

December 18, 1984.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, James C. Henderson, J.

Sheldon R. Rosenthal, Miami, for appellant.

Kimbrell, Hamann, Jennings, Womack, Carlson Kniskern and Bradford A. Thomas, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL and DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.


We affirm the final judgment entered in favor of Government Employees Insurance Company (GEICO) upon a holding that (1) in deciding whether the plaintiff-appellant was entitled to uninsured motorist coverage under the GEICO policy, the trial court, not the arbitrators, was required to determine whether the uninsured motorist policy applied to the case at hand, State Farm Fire Casualty Co. v. Glass, 421 So.2d 759 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), and was empowered to make the threshold factual determination that the uninsured motorist was not solely responsible for the plaintiff's injuries and that the negligence of the insured motorist contributed to the accident as well, see Travelers Insurance Co. v. Wilson, 371 So.2d 145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 385 So.2d 762 (Fla. 1980); and (2) because the appellant had available to her, indeed recovered, benefits from the insured tortfeasor's liability insurer in an amount in excess of the uninsured motorist coverage available under the GEICO policy, she is not entitled to uninsured motorist benefits. See Progressive American Insurance Co. v. McKinnie, 460 So.2d 389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Craft v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 432 So.2d 1343 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 440 So.2d 351 (Fla. 1983); Scharfschwerdt v. Allstate Insurance Co., 430 So.2d 578 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. Timon, 379 So.2d 113 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Behrmann v. Industrial Fire Casualty Insurance Co., 374 So.2d 568 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Travelers Insurance Co. v. Wilson, 371 So.2d 145.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Bradley v. Govt. Employees Ins. Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Dec 18, 1984
460 So. 2d 981 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

In Bradley, the third district held that, in deciding whether the plaintiff-appellant was entitled to uninsured motorist coverage, the court, not the arbitrators, was required to determine whether the uninsured motorist policy was applicable; the court "was empowered to make the threshold factual determination that the uninsured motorist was not solely responsible for the plaintiff's injuries and that the negligence of the insured motorist contributed to the accident as well."

Summary of this case from Allstate Ins. Co. v. Banaszak
Case details for

Bradley v. Govt. Employees Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:TINA M. BRADLEY, APPELLANT, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, A…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Dec 18, 1984

Citations

460 So. 2d 981 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

White v. Ascendant Commercial Ins.

"The insured status of the vehicle... goes to the existence of coverage, which only the court has the power…

Tamburrino v. S. Carolina Ins. Co.

Affirmed. See Colonial Penn Insurance Co. v. Williams, 461 So.2d 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Bradley v.…