Universal Underwriters Insurance Co. v. Stathopoulos
113 So. 3d 957
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Universal Underwriters Insurance Company challenged a partial final judgment adverse to it on the declaratory count of a multicount complaint.
- Katherine M. Di Gregorio, later represented by Stathopoulos as bankruptcy trustee, bought a car; financing was rejected and the dealership asked return of the car.
- A boyfriend, driving, caused a fatal accident before returning the car; Western General Insurance defended the driver in the wrongful death case.
- The wrongful death case resulted in a $3 million judgment payable to the deceased’s estate, which assigned any recovery against Universal to the estate.
- Universal insured the dealership’s garage policy; potential coverage hinged on whether the car remained dealership property while in the driver’s possession without financing.
- Stathopoulos and Western General filed a three-count amended complaint against Universal for declaratory relief, breach of contract, and bad faith; the order at issue held the driver was an insured.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the order a final judgment on insurance coverage appealable? | Universal argues Rule 9.110(m) creates appellate jurisdiction. | Stathopoulos contends no jurisdictional basis under Reed and Rule 9.110(m) exists for this nonfinal order. | No; order is not a final appealable judgment. |
| Does Reed/Rule 9.110(m) grant jurisdiction for review of this nonfinal order? | Universal relies on Reed to permit appellate review of coverage determinations. | Stathopoulos maintains no jurisdiction under Reed or 9.110(m) for nonfinal orders in this context. | Jurisdiction not established; no proper basis under Reed/9.110(m). |
| Is the order reviewable as a partial final judgment under Rule 9.110(k)? | Universal seeks review as a partial final judgment resolving a declaratory count. | Stathopoulos argues the counts are intertwined and cannot be reviewed piecemeal. | Not reviewable as a partial final judgment; piecemeal review is improper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Centennial Insur.*959ance Co. v. Life Bank, 953 So.2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (clarifies 9.110(m) is procedural, not jurisdiction-creating)
- Dahly v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 876 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (three-factor test for partial final judgments)
- Gulf Power Co. v. Harper, 940 So.2d 535 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (reaffirmed nonfinal nature of some declaratory judgments)
- Parkway Bank v. Fort Myers Armature Works, Inc., 658 So.2d 646 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (certiorari limitations for review of orders)
- Mercury Insurance Co. of Florida v. Markham, 938 So.2d 607 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (endorses regard for finality in similar contexts)