Travelers Indemnity Company of Connecticut v. Attorney's Title Insurance Fund, Inc.

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
• Decided: August 1, 2018
• Docket: 16-15386
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 16-15386 Date Filed: 08/01/2018 Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________

No. 16-15386 ________________________

D.C. Docket No. 2:13-cv-00670-SPC-CM

TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CONNECTICUT, ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

RSUI INDEMNITY COMPANY,

Intervenor Plaintiff,

versus

ATTORNEY’S TITLE INSURANCE FUND, INC., SECTION 10 JOINT VENTURE, LLP, SKY PROPERTY VENTURE, LLC, CAS GROUP, INC.,

Defendants-Appellants,

FLORIDA TITLE, CO., et al.,

Defendants,

STEPHAN, COLE & ASSOCIATES, LLC., et al., Case: 16-15386 Date Filed: 08/01/2018 Page: 2 of 2

Respondents.

________________________

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ________________________

(August 1, 2018)

Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, BRANCH, Circuit Judge, and GAYLES,* District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

For the reasons we explained at oral argument, the judgment of the district

court is due to be affirmed under our recent Zucker decision, which establishes that

the financial services exclusion provisions apply to exclude coverage. See Zucker

for BankUnited Fin. Corp. v. U.S. Specialty Ins. Co., 856 F.3d 1343, 1350–51

(11th Cir. 2017). Although we appreciate counsel’s efforts to distinguish Zucker,

we are not persuaded. Given our decision that coverage does not apply, we need

not address the other issues.

To the extent that the argument of Attorney’s Title Insurance Fund and

Florida Title Company that they should not have been in the lawsuit has any

remaining relevance for costs or other reasons, we reject that argument.

AFFIRMED.

* Honorable Darrin P. Gayles, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, sitting by designation.