Zupan v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Zupan v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance

710 So. 2d 594, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2266, 1998 WL 113548

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 11, 1998

DocketNo. 97-2070

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 710 So. 2d 594 (Zupan v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance) 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.

Bluebook

Zupan v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance, 710 So. 2d 594, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2266, 1998 WL 113548 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a summary final judgment in favor of appellant’s uninsured motorist insurer. We reverse and remand.

A written rejection of uninsured motorist (UM) coverage, or selection of UM coverage limits lower than bodily injury limits is to be made on a form approved by the Insurance Commissioner; and if signed by the insured it will be conclusively presumed that there was an informed, knowing rejection of coverage, or election of lower limits. § 627.727(1) (Supp.1992). It follows that if the form does not indicate, at the time it is signed, whether the insured is rejecting coverage or whether the insured is selecting lower limits, the presumption cannot apply.

Here, there is a dispute as to whether, at the time they were signed by the insured, the forms were sufficiently completed to indicate whether the insured was rejecting coverage or selecting lower limits. Because the record revealed a disputed issue of material fact, summary judgment was inappropriate.

GLICKSTEIN, STEVENSON and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a summary final judgment in favor of appellant’s uninsured motorist insurer. We reverse and remand.

A written rejection of uninsured motorist (UM) coverage, or selection of UM coverage limits lower than bodily injury limits is to be made on a form approved by the Insurance Commissioner; and if signed by the insured it will be conclusively presumed that there was an informed, knowing rejection of coverage, or election of lower limits. § 627.727(1) (Supp.1992). It follows that if the form does not indicate, at the time it is signed, whether the insured is rejecting coverage or whether the insured is selecting lower limits, the presumption cannot apply.

Here, there is a dispute as to whether, at the time they were signed by the insured, the forms were sufficiently completed to indicate whether the insured was rejecting coverage or selecting lower limits. Because the record revealed a disputed issue of material fact, summary judgment was inappropriate.

GLICKSTEIN, STEVENSON and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

710 So. 2d 594, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2266, 1998 WL 113548, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zupan-v-nationwide-mutual-fire-insurance-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack