Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Classie

396 So. 2d 1204, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19282
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 21, 1981·No. No. 80-139·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

BASKIN, Judge.

Only the court may determine issues concerning the existence of uninsured motorist coverage, Vigilant Insurance Co. v. Kelps, 372 So.2d 207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), that is, the insurance status of the allegedly negligent motorist. Arbitrators may determine whether the facts of the case disclose a “right or basis for recovery under the coverage provided for in the policy”, Ebens v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 278 So.2d 674, 675 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973), that is, the factual merit of the claim. Government Employees Insurance Co. v. Mirth, 333 So.2d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); see also Allstate Insurance Co. v. Langston, 358 So.2d 1387 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). The trial court correctly ruled in accordance with these principles; we therefore affirm [1205] the Final Judgment which established uninsured motorist coverage and ordered arbitration proceedings as to proximate cause of the injury.

Affirmed.

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

Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Classie, 396 So. 2d 1204, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19282 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

396 So. 2d 1204 (Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Classie) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

ST. FARM MUT. AUTO. INS. CO. v. Stack
543 So. 2d 782 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Stack
543 So. 2d 782 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Stack v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins.
507 So. 2d 617 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Glass
421 So. 2d 759 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)