Nation Watch Security & Investigations, Inc. v. Frontier Insurance Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nation Watch Security & Investigations, Inc. v. Frontier Insurance Co.

732 So. 2d 368, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1444, 1999 WL 71656

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 17, 1999

DocketNo. 98-1009

StatusPublished

This text of 732 So. 2d 368 (Nation Watch Security & Investigations, Inc. v. Frontier 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

Nation Watch Security & Investigations, Inc. v. Frontier Insurance Co., 732 So. 2d 368, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1444, 1999 WL 71656 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The third-party plaintiff, Nation Watch Security and Investigation, Inc. [Nation Watch], appeals from an adverse final summary judgment entered in favor of its insurer, Frontier Insurance Company [Frontier]. We affirm.

A thorough review of the record, including the parties’ depositions, indicates that Nation Watch had knowledge for at least two months before one of its security guards was arrested that the uniforms it had provided them were in violation of a penal statute. Therefore, the trial court properly concluded that Frontier had no duty to defend Nation Watch, or to provide coverage, in the lawsuit brought against it by the arrested security guard because the cause of action alleged fell within the ex-[369]*369elusionary language of the policy that excluded “personal injury” “arising out of the willful violation of a penal statute or ordinance committed by or with the consent of the insured.” See Reliance Ins. Co. v. Lazzara Oil Co., 601 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Accordingly, the trial court properly entered summary judgment in favor of Frontier.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The third-party plaintiff, Nation Watch Security and Investigation, Inc. [Nation Watch], appeals from an adverse final summary judgment entered in favor of its insurer, Frontier Insurance Company [Frontier]. We affirm.

A thorough review of the record, including the parties’ depositions, indicates that Nation Watch had knowledge for at least two months before one of its security guards was arrested that the uniforms it had provided them were in violation of a penal statute. Therefore, the trial court properly concluded that Frontier had no duty to defend Nation Watch, or to provide coverage, in the lawsuit brought against it by the arrested security guard because the cause of action alleged fell within the ex-[369]*369elusionary language of the policy that excluded “personal injury” “arising out of the willful violation of a penal statute or ordinance committed by or with the consent of the insured.” See Reliance Ins. Co. v. Lazzara Oil Co., 601 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Accordingly, the trial court properly entered summary judgment in favor of Frontier.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

732 So. 2d 368, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1444, 1999 WL 71656, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nation-watch-security-investigations-inc-v-frontier-insurance-co-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack