NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
SEITLIN & COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND CARLOS MANUEL CHOMAT AND ELENA QUINTANA CHOMAT, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Insurance Coverage cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Northern Insurance Company of New York (“Northern”), appeals the trial court’s order of final summary judgment in favor of Seitlin & Company (“Seitlin”). We reverse.
The trial court entered summary judgment finding Northern’s umbrella insurance policy provides coverage for the Carlos Manuel Chomat (“Chomat”) claim. In its pleadings, Northern raised affirmative defenses and asserted a counterclaim for rescission of the policy.
Because there are genuine issues of material fact relating to the affirmative defenses and the counterclaim, which may ultimately affect the coverage, we determine that the trial court erred in entering a final judgment on the coverage. See Griffin v. Am. Gen. Life & Accident Ins. Co., 752 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for determination of all issues.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ironshore Specialty Ins. Co. v. Conrad & Scherer, LLP (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)…nd it addresse[d] all of [the insurer’s] affirmative defenses and counterclaims against [the law firm]” and “no 3 outstanding issues of liability remain at issue.” See N. Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Seitlin & Co., 919 So. 2d 534 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). That simply was not true. When the court ruled in favor of the law firm on the duty to defend, its judicial labor was not at an end. The insurer twice brought the remaining affirmative defenses and rescission counterclaim to…
-
Ironshore Specialty Ins. Co. v. Conrad & Scherer, LLP (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)…law firm’s] claims against [the insurer] and it addresse[d] all of [the insurer’s] affirmative defenses and counterclaims against [the law firm]” and “no outstanding issues of liability remain at issue.” See N. Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Seitlin & Co., 919 So. 2d 534 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). That simply was not true. When the court ruled in favor of the law firm on the duty to defend, its judicial labor was not at an end. The insurer twice brought the remaining affirmative defenses and rescission counterclaim to t…
Authorities Cited
- Griffin v. Griffin, 752 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)