Mortgagee Clause

17 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Ahto Walter v. Marine Off. OF Am.
  537 F.2d 89· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-16 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the vessel had not been 'delivered' under the builder's risk policies, and therefore, coverage was in effect when the vessel capsized during transit. The court also held that the mortgagee was entitled to recover under its policy even though the owner had repa
• Schlehuber v. Norfolk & Dedham Mut. Fire Ins. Co.
  281 So. 2d 373· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-07-31 ·cited 29×
  A property purchaser sought to enforce a fire insurance policy issued to the original owners, claiming rights as a third-party beneficiary under the mortgagee clause after the property was damaged by fire shortly after his purchase. The court affirmed the denial of reformation bu
• United States v. Sentinel Fire INS. Co.
  178 F.2d 217· 5th Cir.· 1949-08-13 ·cited 19×
• Merchs. Nat'l Bank v. Se. Fire Ins. Co., Inc.
  751 F.2d 771· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the insurer's denial of Merchants' claim lacked a legitimate or arguable reason, entitling Merchants to a punitive damages instruction, and that the directed verdicts against Bossier and Edna Barlow were erroneous.
• United States v. Springfield Fire & Marine Ins. Co.
  207 F.2d 935· 8th Cir.· 1953-11-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the insurance policy's grain coverage was intended to apply only to grain on hand at the time of contracting, not subsequently produced grain, and thus did not cover the mortgaged corn.
• State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. McFERRIN
  382 F.2d 282· 5th Cir.· 1967-09-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence, computing attorney's fees, or calculating the penalty, and affirmed the judgment.
• RAN Invs., Inc. v. Ind. Ins. Co.
  379 So. 2d 991· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-01-30 ·cited 5×
  Ran Investments appeals the dismissal of its complaint seeking recovery on a fire insurance policy issued to its tenants, the Krais, which named Ran's mortgagee as loss-payee. The court held that a property owner may recover as a third party beneficiary of a mortgagee clause in a
• Wendy M.L. Cooper v. Alford
  446 So. 2d 1093· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-02-08 ·cited 4×
  A loss-payable mortgagee's insurable interest in proceeds of an insurance policy in which he is designated loss-payee is not extinguished by his receipt of payment under a separate insurance policy in which he is named insured, and the mortgagee may recover the full amount of his
• Groner v. Underwriters Ins. Co. & Margaret Sisung
  179 So. 2d 123· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-10-19 ·cited 4×
  Groner appeals a final judgment on Underwriters' cross-claim against him, arising from a dispute over insurance proceeds for hurricane damage to property. The court reverses because the trial court's judgment on the cross-claim was premature, having been based on a summary judgme
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Adana Mortg. Bankers, Inc.
  725 F.2d 1324· 11th Cir.· 1984-03-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the insurance policy's mortgagee clause covered the VA as a successor-assignee, and the lender's cancellation notice was ineffective before the fire, entitling the VA to recover.
• Coy Kinchen and Mabel Kinchen v. Lexington Ins. Co.
  292 F.2d 581· 5th Cir.· 1961-07-20 ·cited 2×
  A breach of warranty in an insurance policy voids coverage unless the breach does not increase the hazard; a mortgagee with knowledge of a breach cannot benefit from the policy.
• Lititz Mut. Ins. Co. v. Barnes
  248 F.2d 241· 5th Cir.· 1957-10-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Wood, as the named insured, retained an insurable interest in the property due to his liability on the mortgage debt, even after conveying the property.
• Solomon Lieberman AND Chevra Lomdei Torah v. Interstate Fire & Cas. Co.
  768 F.2d 81· 3d Cir.· 1985-07-18
  The court held that the district court improperly granted summary judgment by deciding a disputed issue of material fact regarding when the mortgagee received notice of the insurer's denial of the mortgagor's claim.
• Bus. Dev. Corp. OF Ga., Inc. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co.
  747 F.2d 628· 11th Cir.· 1984-11-27
  The court held that the insurance policy, when construed as a whole, granted BDC independent rights as a mortgagee, including a ten-day notice period for cancellation, rather than merely the rights of a loss payee.
• State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. AETNA Fire Underwriters Ins. Co.
  413 So. 2d 144· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-04-28
  A prior fire insurance policy's cancellation should be deemed effective as to the mortgagee, even within the 10-day notice period, if a replacement policy is in force and protects the mortgagee's interest.
• Pettry v. Pruitt
  409 So. 2d 1115· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-02-04
  The Pettrys appealed a judgment denying their claims for equitable subrogation, constructive trust, and accounting regarding insurance settlement proceeds received by the Pruitts and First National Bank following a fire loss. The court affirmed, holding that the one-year time lim
• Ambrose Coppotelli v. Ins. Co. OF N. Am.
  631 F.2d 146· 2d Cir.· 1980-11-07
  The court held that the Coppotellis, as mortgagees, were barred from recovery under the fire insurance policy due to their failure to seek a deficiency judgment after foreclosure, and that the insurer was not bound by a declaratory judgment regarding the named insured (ACI) becau