Santiny v. Stroughter
This text of 396 So. 2d 357 (Santiny v. Stroughter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Plaintiff appealed the dismissal of his suit for uninsured motorist benefits.
The sole issue is the effective date of cancellation of an insurance binder.
We affirm.
On May 9, 1979, plaintiff, then a resident of Florida, applied through the Bruner’s Insurance Agency in Florida for uninsured motorist coverage with Southeastern Fidelity Insurance Company. Bruner’s bound coverage for plaintiff until it was notified of rejection by Southeastern Fidelity Insurance Company on May 21, 1979. In the meantime, plaintiff left Florida to attend LSU in Baton Rouge without leaving a forwarding address. As a result, Bruner’s correspondence to plaintiff was delayed. After attempting to notify plaintiff of the rejection and receiving no response, Bruner’s tried to get coverage with Eastern Insurance Company. Not having an application for Eastern, Bruner’s filed an application on another company’s form and mailed it to Eastern’s broker, Jack West & Associates, Inc., on May 25, 1979, binding coverage from that date. On June 5, 1979, plaintiff wrote to Bruner’s requesting that his policy be cancelled “at this time”. On the same date, Jack West & Associates wrote Bruner’s requesting plaintiff complete an Eastern application form. When no application was forthcoming, Jack West & Associates sent a notice of cancellation of the binder to plaintiff on June 22 effective as of July 5. Bruner’s then noti[359]*359fied Jack West & Associates of plaintiff’s letter of cancellation and Jack West & Associates “flat cancelled” the binder.1
Plaintiff was injured June 12,1979 by the negligence of an uninsured motorist.
Accepting June 5, 1979, as the date of cancellation, the trial court dismissed plaintiff’s suit against defendant Eastern.
Plaintiff argues the cancellation of Eastern’s binder was not effective until July 5, 1979. He contends the only written documentary evidence of the cancellation of his binder is the notice given a July 5 effective date. He attempts to explain that he thought he would have a 30 day grace period after his own written request for cancellation, “at this time” dated June 5, 1979.
He further contends the June 22, 1979 notice was responsive to plaintiff’s letter of cancellation. We find no error in the court’s acceptance of defendant broker’s testimony that the June 22, 1979 notice of cancellation was based upon plaintiff’s failure to submit a proper application. Only after Jack West & Associates received notice from Bruner’s of plaintiff’s June 5, 1979 request for cancellation did it “flat cancel” the binder.
We agree with the trial court that plaintiff’s written request complies with the cancellation provision of Eastern’s policy.2 Mouchon v. Palmer, 265 So.2d 429 (Florida App. 4th Dist. 1972).
Plaintiff next contends the request for cancellation cannot be interpreted to ask cancellation retroactively to May 29, 1979. Defendant testified that because plaintiff had not submitted a proper application the binder was cancelled as if it had never been issued and plaintiff refunded his full premium. At the least, plaintiff’s letter indicates an intention for his policy to be cancelled as of June 5, 1979, seven days prior to his accident.
Plaintiff last contends his original application prohibits “flat cancellations”. This application was rejected by Southeastern approximately three weeks before plaintiff requested cancellation of his insurance coverage. The only coverage in effect at the time of plaintiff’s request was a binder issued by Jack West & Associates, Inc. for Eastern Insurance Company. There is no evidence Eastern prohibited “flat cancellations”. Jack West testified that the usual company procedure was to cancel a policy upon an insured’s request the day after the postmark. In this case, as no proper application had been received before the request for cancellation, Jack West & Associates cancelled the binder retroactive to its issuance and returned all of plaintiff’s money.
Plaintiff’s reliance on LSA-R.S. 22:636 3 and the jurisprudence thereunder is [360]*360misplaced. In the first place, the statute would be inapplicable to an insurance policy issued in Florida to a Florida resident. Furthermore, the statute addresses itself to cancellation of a policy by the insurance company. The cancellation here was on plaintiff’s own initiative.
For the above reasons, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed at appellant’s costs.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
396 So. 2d 357, 1981 La. App. LEXIS 3698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santiny-v-stroughter-lactapp-1981.