Underwriters at Lloyd's, London v. A.I. Credit Corp.
This text of 478 So. 2d 887 (Underwriters at Lloyd's, London v. A.I. Credit Corp.) 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.
Opinion
We reverse the order entered on the parties’ motions for summary judgment insofar as it grants A.I. Credit Corporation’s [A.I. Credit] motion and denies Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London’s [Underwriters] motion. The clear and unambiguous language of the insurance policy requires that notice of cancellation be sent directly to Underwriters.1 The policy expressly pro[888]*888vides that notice to an agent is not sufficient to effect a change.2 A.I. Credit failed to send Underwriters written notice of cancellation. Thus, A.I. Credit is not entitled to a refund of premiums. Even if the agency and broker who placed the insurance were agents of Underwriters, a matter which we need not determine, notice to the agency and broker was insufficient to cancel the policy. We therefore reverse the summary final judgment entered in favor of A.I. Credit and remand with directions to enter summary final judgment for Underwriters. We leave intact the trial court’s reservation of pending motions against other parties.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
478 So. 2d 887, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2617, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17106, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/underwriters-at-lloyds-london-v-ai-credit-corp-fladistctapp-1985.