Romano v. Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Romano v. Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance Co.

550 So. 2d 1169, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2377, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5547, 1989 WL 118629

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 11, 1989

DocketNo. 88-3150

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 550 So. 2d 1169 (Romano v. Michigan Millers Mutual 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

Romano v. Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance Co., 550 So. 2d 1169, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2377, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5547, 1989 WL 118629 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. In this dispute over coverage under a homeowner’s insurance policy, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the appellee-insurer and against the appellant-insured on three (3) different grounds. We affirm because we find no error in the trial court’s conclusion that the incident in question was excluded under a business pursuits exclusion in the policy. We believe the trial court was correct in concluding that there was no dispute that the incident in question arose out of a business pursuit of the insured. Cf. State Farm Casualty Co. v. Friend, 478 So.2d 1198 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 488 So.2d 831 (Fla.1986).

ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN and WARNER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. In this dispute over coverage under a homeowner’s insurance policy, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the appellee-insurer and against the appellant-insured on three (3) different grounds. We affirm because we find no error in the trial court’s conclusion that the incident in question was excluded under a business pursuits exclusion in the policy. We believe the trial court was correct in concluding that there was no dispute that the incident in question arose out of a business pursuit of the insured. Cf. State Farm Casualty Co. v. Friend, 478 So.2d 1198 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 488 So.2d 831 (Fla.1986).

ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN and WARNER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

550 So. 2d 1169, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2377, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5547, 1989 WL 118629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/romano-v-michigan-millers-mutual-insurance-co-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack