Safeco Insurance Co. v. Centennial Insurance Co.

572 So. 2d 5, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9123, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2922
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 4, 1990·No. No. 90-788·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There being no bona fide dispute on this record that the insured, at the time he applied for an automobile insurance policy in Colorado, notified the issuing company that he was a resident of the State of Florida, we affirm the trial court’s summary judgment, which refused to enforce as contrary to Florida law the “other insurance clause of the contract” pursuant to Gillen v. United Services Automobile Association, 300 So.2d 3 (Fla.1974); Gordon v. Russell, 561 So.2d 603 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Gustafson v. Jensen, 515 So.2d 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Adams v. Brannan, 500 So.2d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). Therefore the summary judgment under review is affirmed.

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

Safeco Insurance Co. v. Centennial Insurance Co., 572 So. 2d 5, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9123, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2922 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

572 So. 2d 5 (Safeco Insurance Co. v. Centennial Insurance Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Adams v. Brannan
500 So. 2d 236 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Gillen v. United Services Automobile Association
300 So. 2d 3 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1974)
Gordon v. Russell
561 So. 2d 603 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Gustafson v. Jensen
515 So. 2d 1298 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)