TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
WILLIE BILLUE, AND QUIK STAFF, APPELLEES

Fla. 1st DCA | 2000-04-04
No. 1D99-0519
KAHN, WEBSTER and PADOVANO, JJ., Concur.
763 So. 2d 1204 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2000) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We conclude that the judge of compensation claims erred in determining that insurance coverage exists under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. It is true that the insurance carrier failed to respond to the employer’s request to add Florida to the list of covered states, but the carrier never made any representation to the employer that it would provide coverage for accidents occurring in Florida. Promissory estoppel requires proof that one party relied to his detriment on an affirmative representation made by another. See Crown Life Ins. Co. v. McBride, 517 So. 2d 660 (Fla.1987). It cannot apply in a case such as this where one party has made an assumption based on the other party’s failure to act. Because this issue is disposi-tive, we need not address the remaining points in the appeal and cross-appeal.

Reversed.

KAHN, WEBSTER and PADOVANO, JJ., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • ZC Ins. Co. v. Annis Brooks, 847 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
    …that his affirmative representations would induce the promisee into action or forbearance substantial in nature, and where the promisee shows that such rebanee thereon was to his detriment.” Id. (emphasis added). See also Travelers Indem. v. Billue, 763 So. 2d 1204, 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (noting promissory estoppel requires proof that one party relied to his detriment on the affirmative misrepresentation of another); Prof'l Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Freytes & Sons Corp., 565 So. 2d 900, 903 (Fla. 5th DCA 199…
  • McGREGOR v. State, 763 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. We certify the question of great public importance formerly certified in Davenport v. State, 763 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), and Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999): DOES THE PRISON RELEASEE REOFFENDER PUNISHMENT ACT, CODIFIED AS SECTION 775.082(8), FLORIDA STATUTES (1997), VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF POWERS CLAUSE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUT…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw