Houck v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Houck v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

643 So. 2d 124, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9947, 1994 WL 562283

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 17, 1994

DocketNo. 93-3333

StatusPublished

This text of 643 So. 2d 124 (Houck v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance) 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

Houck v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance, 643 So. 2d 124, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9947, 1994 WL 562283 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants seek review of a summary final judgment entered against them in their action seeking underinsured motorist benefits on account of the death of their son. We conclude that this case is substantively indistinguishable from, and, therefore, controlled by, our decision in Travelers Insurance Companies v. Chandler, 569 So.2d 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), upon which appellants relied in the trial court. Accordingly, we reverse the summary judgment entered in favor of appellee.

Appellants ask that we remand with directions that the trial court enter the partial summary judgment in their favor on the issue of coverage which they had previously requested. However, the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of appellee was based upon a conclusion of law, without regard to what the material facts might be. Because of the procedural posture of the case when the trial court entered summary judgment, it is not clear whether a dispute existed as to any material fact. Therefore,, it would not be appropriate for this court to direct the entry of a partial summary judgment in favor of appellants.

The summary final judgment in favor of appellee is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

ERVIN, BARFIELD and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants seek review of a summary final judgment entered against them in their action seeking underinsured motorist benefits on account of the death of their son. We conclude that this case is substantively indistinguishable from, and, therefore, controlled by, our decision in Travelers Insurance Companies v. Chandler, 569 So.2d 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), upon which appellants relied in the trial court. Accordingly, we reverse the summary judgment entered in favor of appellee.

Appellants ask that we remand with directions that the trial court enter the partial summary judgment in their favor on the issue of coverage which they had previously requested. However, the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of appellee was based upon a conclusion of law, without regard to what the material facts might be. Because of the procedural posture of the case when the trial court entered summary judgment, it is not clear whether a dispute existed as to any material fact. Therefore,, it would not be appropriate for this court to direct the entry of a partial summary judgment in favor of appellants.

The summary final judgment in favor of appellee is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

ERVIN, BARFIELD and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

643 So. 2d 124, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9947, 1994 WL 562283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houck-v-state-farm-mutual-automobile-insurance-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack