From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sapienza v. Security Ins. Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 21, 1989
543 So. 2d 845 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Summary

holding that because the garage keepers policy covered liability for motor vehicle accidents compliance with § 627.727 was required

Summary of this case from Burlington Insurance v. Asturias USA Motorsports Co.

Opinion

No. 87-0626.

May 17, 1989. Rehearing and Clarification Denied June 21, 1989.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Broward County, J. Leonard Fleet, J.

Mark R. McCollem and Mark N. Hirsch of Chidnese McCollem, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

James G. Salerno and Paula Kessler of Pyszka, Kessler, Massey, Weldon, Catri, Holton Douberley, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.


We reverse the order of the trial court granting appellee's motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. Appellant's complaint was for arbitration on uninsured motorist benefits under a garage keepers policy. Appellee moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that a garage keepers policy does not fall within the statutory mandates of section 627.727, Florida Statutes (1987), providing for uninsured motorist coverage. However, in Coleman v. Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, 517 So.2d 686 (Fla. 1988), the supreme court considered a garage keeper's policy of insurance and determined that uninsured motorist coverage under section 627.727, Florida Statutes (1987), was afforded. It is the substance of the policy and not the title which controls whether or not section 627.727, Florida Statutes (1987), applies. See Chicago Insurance Company v. Dominguez, 420 So.2d 882 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Aetna Casualty Surety Company v. Fulton, 362 So.2d 364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978).

The garage keepers policy covers liability for motor vehicle accidents. Therefore, compliance with section 627.727, Florida Statutes (1987), was required. Chicago Insurance Company.

Reversed and remanded to reinstate plaintiff's complaint and for further proceedings thereon.

HERSEY, C.J., and STONE and WARNER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Sapienza v. Security Ins. Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 21, 1989
543 So. 2d 845 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

holding that because the garage keepers policy covered liability for motor vehicle accidents compliance with § 627.727 was required

Summary of this case from Burlington Insurance v. Asturias USA Motorsports Co.
Case details for

Sapienza v. Security Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:RANDALL SAPIENZA, APPELLANT, v. SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jun 21, 1989

Citations

543 So. 2d 845 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Citing Cases

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins v. Palacino

I would follow Jernigan. See also Sapienza v. Security Ins. Co. of Hartford, 543 So.2d 845 (Fla. 4th DCA),…

Security Ins. Co. Hartford v. Sapienza

This is the second time this case has been before us. On the first occasion, we held that although the policy…