Echevarria v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Echevarria v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

447 So. 2d 1014, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12569

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 3, 1984·No. No. 83-1734·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We adhere to the holding of Johnson v. Prudential Property & Casualty Ins. Co., 365 So.2d 441 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) that the exclusion of a non-owner of a vehicle from the personal injury protection coverage of the owner’s carrier which arises under Sec. 627.736(4)(d)4 b., Fla.Stat. (1981)¹ when she is “entitled to personal injury benefits from the insurer of the owner ... of ... another] motor vehicle” is not affected by the fact that the latter policy is subject to a deductible as provided by Sec. 627.739. Farley v. Gateway Ins. Co., 302 So.2d 177 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974), Protective Nat’l Ins. Co. of Omaha v. Bergouignan, 335 So.2d 871 (Fla.3d DCA 1976), and Security Ins. Co. v. Howgate, 343 So.2d 641 (Fla.3d DCA 1977), upon which the claimant relies, are entirely distinguishable since, unlike the present situation, no valid Florida policy covered the claimant and neither of the statutory exclusions applied. Any claim of the appellant concerning the impropriety of the deductible itself is properly directed against her own p.i.p. carrier under Industrial Fire & Casualty Co. v. Kwechin, 447 So.2d 1337 (Fla.1983)² rather than the present insurer.

Affirmed.

Footnotes

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

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We adhere to the holding of Johnson v. Prudential Property & Casualty Ins. Co., 365 So.2d 441 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) that the exclusion of a non-owner of a vehicle from the personal injury protection coverage of the owner’s carrier which arises under Sec. 627.736(4)(d)4 b., Fla.Stat. (1981)¹ when she is “entitled to personal injury benefits from the insurer of the owner ... of ... another] motor vehicle” is not affected by the fact that the latter policy is subject to a deductible as provided by Sec. 627.739. Farley v. Gateway Ins. Co., 302 So.2d 177 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974), Protective Nat’l Ins. Co. of Omaha v. Bergouignan, 335 So.2d 871 (Fla.3d DCA 1976), and Security Ins. Co. v. Howgate, 343 So.2d 641 (Fla.3d DCA 1977), upon which the claimant relies, are entirely distinguishable since, unlike the present situation, no valid Florida policy covered the claimant and neither of the statutory exclusions applied. Any claim of the appellant concerning the impropriety of the deductible itself is properly directed against her own p.i.p. carrier under Industrial Fire & Casualty Co. v. Kwechin, 447 So.2d 1337 (Fla.1983)² rather than the present insurer.

Affirmed.

Footnotes

Echevarria v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 447 So. 2d 1014, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12569 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

447 So. 2d 1014 (Echevarria v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Footnotes

Related