JOHN MICHAEL POLAND, AN UNDERWRITER AT LLOYDS, LONDON, APPELLANT,
v.
PHILIP DASH AND HARRIET DASH, HIS WIFE, HIGHLANDS INSURANCE COMPANY AND SAVAGE-MANFRE & ASSOCIATES, INC., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Ambiguity In Insurance Contracts cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We agree with the trial court that since the relevant insurance policies do not clearly and unambiguously create a coverage exclusion for the water loss suffered by the Dashes, the Dashes are entitled to total coverage, as a matter of law, on the 65%-35% participation ratio provided by the applicable insurance provisions. The trial court’s ruling is supported by the well-settled “general rule of interpretation that when the terms of an insurance policy are capable of two or more constructions, the construction permitting recovery is to be given effect.” Shelby Mutual Insurance Company of Shelby, Ohio v. Manchester, 376 So. 2d 266, 268 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 388 So. 2d 1118 (Fla.1980) (and cases cited therein). Summary judgment in favor of appellees is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jewell Sterling v. City OF W. Palm Beach & State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 595 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…he policy, or if the policy is subject to two or more constructions, then the construction permitting recovery is to be given effect. Insurance policies, and exclusions in particular, are to be construed strictly against the insurer. Poland v. Dash, 441 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Carter v. American Fire & Casualty Co., 219 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969). State Farm argues that the appellant admitted the damages sustained by her were the result of water damage, caused by water which backed up through the…
Authorities Cited
- Shelby Mut. Ins. Co. of Shelby v. Manchester, 376 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)