Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. Pinecrest Ltd. Partnership

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. Pinecrest Ltd. Partnership

739 So. 2d 733, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12218, 1999 WL 729107

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 13, 1999·No. No. 99-1018·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the final summary judgment as the trial court properly enforced the insurance policy in accordance with its plain language and entered judgment concerning the attorney’s fee issue in favor of appellees. See Wilson v. Wasser, 562 So.2d 339 (Fla.1990); Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Bouchoc, 514 So.2d 52 (Fla.1987); Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. Lamm, 218 So.2d 219 (Fla. 3d [734] DCA), cert. denied, 225 So.2d 529 (Fla.1969).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the final summary judgment as the trial court properly enforced the insurance policy in accordance with its plain language and entered judgment concerning the attorney’s fee issue in favor of appellees. See Wilson v. Wasser, 562 So.2d 339 (Fla.1990); Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Bouchoc, 514 So.2d 52 (Fla.1987); Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. Lamm, 218 So.2d 219 (Fla. 3d [734] DCA), cert. denied, 225 So.2d 529 (Fla.1969).

Affirmed.

Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. Pinecrest Ltd. Partnership, 739 So. 2d 733, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12218, 1999 WL 729107 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

739 So. 2d 733 (Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. Pinecrest Ltd. Partnership) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related