Travelers Commercial Insurance Company, etc. v. Crystal Marie Harrington
154 So. 3d 1106
Fla.2014Background
- Crystal Harrington (class I insured) was injured as a passenger in a car owned by her father and driven with permission by Joey Williams (class II insured).
- The vehicle was insured under a Travelers policy purchased by Harrington’s mother (named insured); the policy provided liability limits of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per accident and non‑stacked UM limits of $100,000/$300,000.
- Williams’s insurer (Nationwide) paid its $50,000 liability limit and Travelers paid its $100,000 liability limit; Harrington’s damages exceeded those combined payments.
- Travelers denied Harrington’s claim for underinsured/UM benefits based on a family‑vehicle exclusion that excluded insured family vehicles from the definition of an "uninsured motor vehicle."
- At trial the court granted summary judgment to Harrington (finding the exclusion conflicted with §627.727(3) and that the named insured’s non‑stacking election did not bind Harrington). The First DCA affirmed and certified two questions to the Florida Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a family‑vehicle exclusion conflicts with §627.727(3)(b) (underinsured tortfeasor treated as uninsured) | Harrington: exclusion void; underinsured vehicle must be treated as uninsured so she can stack UM with liability under same policy | Travelers: statute makes uninsured definition “subject to the terms and conditions of such coverage”; policy unambiguously excludes family vehicles | No conflict; exclusion valid. §627.727(3)(b) is subject to policy terms and does not require stacking liability and UM under same policy (Warren controlling) |
| Whether a named insured’s election of non‑stacking UM binds other insureds under §627.727(9) when those insureds did not sign | Harrington: non‑stacking waiver not binding on her because she did not personally sign the form | Travelers: named insured’s signed election and premium reduction should bind all insureds; policy and statutory scheme treat election on a policy basis | Waiver by named insured is binding on all insureds; non‑stacking election applies to Harrington |
Key Cases Cited
- Travelers Ins. Co. v. Warren, 678 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 1996) (§627.727(3)(b) does not require stacking liability and UM under the same policy; “liability insurer” refers to insurer other than UM insurer)
- Shelby Mut. Ins. Co. v. Smith, 556 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1990) (historical treatment of UM coverage and legislative expansion to underinsured tortfeasors)
- Reid v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 352 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 1977) (policy may exclude the insured vehicle from definition of uninsured motor vehicle)
- Sommerville v. Allstate Ins. Co., 65 So. 3d 558 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (policy limitations and exclusions are valid if unambiguous and consistent with UM statute)
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Baker, 543 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (a vehicle cannot be both insured for liability and uninsured for UM under the same policy)