NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE HOME INSURANCE COMPANY, A NEW YORK CORPORATION, AND VIRGINIA W. STEFFEY, APPELLEES
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.
This case concerns whether an insurance policy was effectively cancelled based on an oral request from a husband without his estranged wife's knowledge or consent. The court affirmed the lower court's decision that the cancellation was not effective.
No, the cancellation was not effective because the estranged husband lacked the authority to cancel the policy on behalf of his wife, who was unaware of the request and had been paying the premiums.
“The issue to be resolved by the chancellor in this declaratory decree action was whether a policy issued by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company to Virginia W. Steffey and her husband John F. Steffey, was effectively cancelled with respect to coverage of Virginia W. Steffey by the oral request of her husband after they were legally separated for several years and without the authority, permission or knowledge of his estranged wife, who had been paying the premiums; no notice of cancellation being given to her.”
This quote outlines the central issue and factual background of the case.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNationwide Mutual Insurance Company issued a policy to Virginia W. Steffey and her husband, John F. Steffey. The couple had been legally separated for…
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 Insurance Policy Cancellation cases and more on FLexlaw
The issue to be resolved by the chancellor in this declaratory decree action was whether a policy issued by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company to Virginia W. Steffey and her husband John F. Steffey, was effectively cancelled with respect to coverage of Virginia W. Steffey by the oral request of her husband after they were legally separated for several years and without the authority, permission or knowledge of his estranged wife, who had been paying the premiums; no notice of cancellation being given to her.
The chancellor concluded that the cancellation was not effective. Jurisdiction under Chapter 87, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. was proper. Millers Mut. F. Ins. Co. of Tex. v. American Fid. F. Ins. Co., Fla.App.1965, 178 So.2d 742. The facts were sufficient to support the conclusions of the chancellor and we affirm.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Home Ins. Co., 201 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1967)…Certiorari denied without opinion. 194 So. 2d 37.…
Authorities Cited
- Millers Mut. Fire Ins. Co. OF Tex. v. Am. Fid. Fire Ins. Co., 178 So. 2d 742 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)