EDWARD FINOCCHIO, APPELLANT,
v.
U. S. FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the statutory amendment regarding setoff against uninsured motorist coverage should not be applied retroactively.
Appellant was injured by an underinsured motorist and received policy limits from that driver's insurer. Appellant's own insurer paid PIP and medical …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Personal Injury Protection Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
BOOTH, Judge.
This cause is before us on appeal from a final declaratory judgment entered in the Circuit Court, Alachua County, holding that appellee, U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Company, was entitled to a setoff against uninsured motorist coverage provided appellant for personal injury protection benefits and medical payment benefits paid to or on behalf of appellant. We affirm.
The insured, appellant herein, was involved in an automobile accident on February 23, 1979 with an underinsured motorist, whose liability insurer paid the $10,000 policy limits to appellant. Appellant’s own insurer paid him $10,000 in PIP benefits and $5,000 in medical benefits under its policy, which provided for UM coverage of $100,-000. Appellant contends that Florida Statutes § 627.727(1), as amended effective October 1,1979,1 should be applied retroactive ly so as to make the setoff improper. Two recent cases from this court hold to the contrary. Carter v. Government Employee’s Insurance Company, 377 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979, cert. denied, 389 So. 2d 1108 (Fla.1980); Hall v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 376 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied, 385 So. 2d 757 (Fla.1979). We adhere to those opinions, recognizing that a contrary view has been taken in State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Bergman, 387 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
Accordingly, the judgment below is affirmed.
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., and SHAW, JJ., concur. . Chapter 79-241, Laws of Florida: . nly the underinsured motorist’s automobile liability insurance shall be set-off against underinsured motorist coverage . . .
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Douglas v. Iowa Nat'l Mut. Ins. Co., 400 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)…that the issue presented by the appellant in this case has already been decided by this Court in Carter v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 377 So. 2d 242, cert. denied 389 So. 2d 1108 (Fla.1980), and Finnocchio v. U.S. Fidelity & Guarantee Co., 389 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), and must affirm the trial judge on that basis. Pursuant to Article V, § 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution (1980), however, we certify that this decision is in direct conflict with the Fifth District Court of Appeal’s decision in Sta…
Authorities Cited
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gerhard S. Bergman, 387 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Carter v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. & Eual T. Berry, 377 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)
- Lanny Hall v. Liberty Mut. INS. Co., 376 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)