Karen Anderson v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company

Eleventh Circuit

Karen Anderson v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company

216 F.3d 1280, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 15502, 2000 WL 873328

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedJuly 3, 2000

Docket97-3270

StatusPublished

This text of 216 F.3d 1280 (Karen Anderson v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Karen Anderson v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company, 216 F.3d 1280, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 15502, 2000 WL 873328 (11th Cir. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

On April 13, 1999, we issued an opinion in this case in which we requested the Florida Supreme Court’s assistance with respect to a certified question concerning whether the tractor-trailer rig involved in this case should be treated as a single-covered automobile, under the insurance policy language forming the basis of the present dispute, or whether the single accident resulting in plaintiff-appellee Anderson’s injuries constituted two occurrences within the meaning of the policy. See Anderson v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 172 F.3d 767, 770 (11th Cir.1999). The Florida Supreme Court rephrased the questions as follows:

I. Based on the applicable insurance policy language, should the tractor and trailer each be treated as a single covered automobile?

II. If the tractor and trailer should each be treated as a single covered automobile, does the applicable policy language unambiguously limit coverage to a total of $750,000, even when multiple insured vehicles are involved in a single accident?

Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Anderson, 756 So.2d 29 (Fla.2000). The Florida Supreme Court then answered “the first rephrased certified question in the affirmative,” finding “that the tractor and trailer should each be treated as a single covered automobile.” Id. at 33. The Florida Supreme *1281 Court answered “the second rephrased certified question in the negative” finding that the policy provided “separate liability coverages for each insured vehicle that was involved in the accident” and “the total available liability coverage for the accident that involved both vehicles is $1,500,000.” Id. at 37.

Because the Florida Supreme Court’s holdings are consistent with the rulings of the district court, the district court’s grant of summary judgment and award of $1,500,000 to Anderson for her injuries is AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

On April 13, 1999, we issued an opinion in this case in which we requested the Florida Supreme Court’s assistance with respect to a certified question concerning whether the tractor-trailer rig involved in this case should be treated as a single-covered automobile, under the insurance policy language forming the basis of the present dispute, or whether the single accident resulting in plaintiff-appellee Anderson’s injuries constituted two occurrences within the meaning of the policy. See Anderson v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 172 F.3d 767, 770 (11th Cir.1999). The Florida Supreme Court rephrased the questions as follows:

I. Based on the applicable insurance policy language, should the tractor and trailer each be treated as a single covered automobile?

II. If the tractor and trailer should each be treated as a single covered automobile, does the applicable policy language unambiguously limit coverage to a total of $750,000, even when multiple insured vehicles are involved in a single accident?

Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Anderson, 756 So.2d 29 (Fla.2000). The Florida Supreme Court then answered “the first rephrased certified question in the affirmative,” finding “that the tractor and trailer should each be treated as a single covered automobile.” Id. at 33. The Florida Supreme *1281 Court answered “the second rephrased certified question in the negative” finding that the policy provided “separate liability coverages for each insured vehicle that was involved in the accident” and “the total available liability coverage for the accident that involved both vehicles is $1,500,000.” Id. at 37.

Because the Florida Supreme Court’s holdings are consistent with the rulings of the district court, the district court’s grant of summary judgment and award of $1,500,000 to Anderson for her injuries is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 F.3d 1280, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 15502, 2000 WL 873328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/karen-anderson-v-auto-owners-insurance-company-ca11-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack