American States Insurance Co. v. Transamerica Insurance Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

American States Insurance Co. v. Transamerica Insurance Co.

515 So. 2d 260, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2304, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 10390

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 24, 1987

DocketNo. 86-1978

StatusPublished

This text of 515 So. 2d 260 (American States Insurance Co. v. Transamerica Insurance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American States Insurance Co. v. Transamerica Insurance Co., 515 So. 2d 260, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2304, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 10390 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

COWART, Judge.

This is a controversy between the liability insurer of the owner-lessor, and the liability insurer of the lessee of a motor vehicle, as to the priority and amount each insurer is liable for bodily injuries caused to a third party by the operation of the leased vehicle by the lessee’s employee.

We earlier held in this controversy that because a certain provision of the lease agreement did not satisfy the “boldface” type requirement of section 627.7263, Florida Statutes, it was not effective to shift responsibility for primary liability coverage from the lessor to the lessee. Accordingly, we held the owner-lessor’s insurer provided primary liability coverage up to the statutory minimum requirement ($10,000). We remanded for the trial court to determine liability for subsequent layers of insurance coverage. Holler Rental Co. v. Marsh, 488 So.2d 653 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). On remand, the trial court determined that, following the owner-lessor’s insurer’s statutory primary coverage of $10,000, next, by virtue of the driver’s status as active tortfeasor, the driver’s insurer (being the lessee-employer’s insurer) provided “excess” coverage to the extent of valid and collectible coverage ($250,000 in this case); then, by virtue of the vicarious secondary liability of the owner-lessor under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine for the negligence of a permissive user of its vehicle (and section 324.151(l)(a), Florida Statutes), the owner-lessor’s insurer again provided “excess” or “umbrella” coverage to the limits of valid and collectible coverage ($490,000 in this case).

We affirm on the authority of Allstate Ins. Co. of Canada v. Value Rent-A-Car of Florida, Inc., 463 So.2d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review denied, 476 So.2d 672 (Fla.1985).

AFFIRMED.

UPCHURCH, C.J., and DAUKSCH, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

COWART, Judge.

This is a controversy between the liability insurer of the owner-lessor, and the liability insurer of the lessee of a motor vehicle, as to the priority and amount each insurer is liable for bodily injuries caused to a third party by the operation of the leased vehicle by the lessee’s employee.

We earlier held in this controversy that because a certain provision of the lease agreement did not satisfy the “boldface” type requirement of section 627.7263, Florida Statutes, it was not effective to shift responsibility for primary liability coverage from the lessor to the lessee. Accordingly, we held the owner-lessor’s insurer provided primary liability coverage up to the statutory minimum requirement ($10,000). We remanded for the trial court to determine liability for subsequent layers of insurance coverage. Holler Rental Co. v. Marsh, 488 So.2d 653 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). On remand, the trial court determined that, following the owner-lessor’s insurer’s statutory primary coverage of $10,000, next, by virtue of the driver’s status as active tortfeasor, the driver’s insurer (being the lessee-employer’s insurer) provided “excess” coverage to the extent of valid and collectible coverage ($250,000 in this case); then, by virtue of the vicarious secondary liability of the owner-lessor under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine for the negligence of a permissive user of its vehicle (and section 324.151(l)(a), Florida Statutes), the owner-lessor’s insurer again provided “excess” or “umbrella” coverage to the limits of valid and collectible coverage ($490,000 in this case).

We affirm on the authority of Allstate Ins. Co. of Canada v. Value Rent-A-Car of Florida, Inc., 463 So.2d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review denied, 476 So.2d 672 (Fla.1985).

AFFIRMED.

UPCHURCH, C.J., and DAUKSCH, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

515 So. 2d 260, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2304, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 10390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-states-insurance-co-v-transamerica-insurance-co-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack