Appellant, CASE NO. 1D08-2536



Similar documents
David P. Healy of Law Offices of David P. Healy, PL, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County. R.V. Swanson, Judge.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County. Paul S. Bryan, Judge.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. Appellant/Cross Appellee, v. CASE NO.

CASE NO. 1D James F. McKenzie of McKenzie & Hall, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellees.

CASE NO. 1D An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Thomas G. Portuallo, Judge.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D

An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Ellen Lorenzen, Judge.

CASE NO. 1D An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Paul T. Terlizzese, Judge.

CASE NO. 1D An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Margaret E. Sojourner, Judge.

An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Gerardo Castiello, Judge.

CASE NO. 1D George Gingo and James E. Orth, Jr. of Gingo & Orth, P.A., Titusville, for Appellant.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D14-279

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

CASE NO. 1D John H. Adams, P. Michael Patterson, and Cecily M. Welsh of Emmanuel, Sheppard, and Condon, Pensacola, for Appellant.

CASE NO. 1D Robert O. Beasley and Phillip A. Pugh of Litvak Beasley & Wilson, LLP Pensacola, for Appellee.

With regard to the coverage issue 1 : With regard to the stacking issue 2 :

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

CASE NO. 1D John W. Wesley of Wesley, McGrail & Wesley, Ft. Walton Beach, for Appellants.

No. 64,825. [January 10, 1985] So.2d 1041 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), which the district court has

No. 64,990. [April 25, 1985] We have for review Aetna Insurance Co. v. Norman, 444. So.2d 1124 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), based upon express and direct

CASE NO. 1D An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Donna S. Remsnyder, Judge.

PRUDENTIAL PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA APPELLATE DIVISION

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2011

CASE NO. 1D The instant appeal originated with a medical malpractice complaint filed by

No APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2007

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

CASE NO. 1D An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Donna S. Remsnyder, Judge.

2015 IL App (1st) U No March 31, 2015 Modified Upon Denial of Rehearing May 12, 2015 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED OF FLORIDA

v. CASE NO.: CVA Lower Court Case No.: 2008-CC-7009-O

v. CASE NO.: 2010-CV-15-A Lower Court Case No.: 2008-CC O

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 1D David K. Miller, of Broad and Cassel, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

CASE NO. 1D Bruce A. Gartner, of Bruce A. Gartner, P.A., Jacksonville Beach, for Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D Rhonda B. Boggess of Taylor, Day, Currie, Boyd & Johnson, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Nos. 67,368 & 67,409

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and J. Clifton Cox, Special Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY CASE NO.: 2013-CV A-O LOWER COURT CASE NO SC-8734-O

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No FRANCIS J. GUGLIELMELLI Appellant STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A Minnesota Board of Chiropractic Examiners, Respondent, vs. Curtis L. Cich, D.C., et al., Appellants.

2010 PA Super 129. Appeal from the Judgment entered May 19, 2009, Court of Common Pleas, Westmorland County, Civil, at No.

Michael C. Clarke and Betsy E. Gallagher of Kubicki Draper, P.A., Tampa, for Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

2012 WI APP 87 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2012

[July 16, REVISED OPINION. We have for review two cases of the district courts of

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED OF FLORIDA

2012 WI APP 17 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED OF FLORIDA

Supreme Court of Florida

How To Get A $1.5 Multiplier On Attorney'S Fees In Florida

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

F I L E D August 9, 2011

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2012).

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D14-360

How To Get A Disability Payout

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2013

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT January Term 2006

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D

No. 101,834 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. In the Matter of the Marriage of. MARC H. HALL, Appellant, and. SUSAN C. HALL, Appellee.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

Supreme Court of Florida

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

Upon consideration of the motions for rehearing, the original opinion heretofore filed is withdrawn and the following substituted therefor.

CASE NO. 1D Peter S. Roumbos and Joseph A. Kopacz of Young, Bill, Roumbos & Boles, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellants.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Juan A. Bello, Judge. Joy E. Greyer, West Palm Beach, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED OF FLORIDA

[Cite as Finkovich v. State Auto Ins. Cos., 2004-Ohio-1123.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT AND OPINION

No. 65,738. [July 3,1985]

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES FOR REHEARING AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON March 11, 2015 Session

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2014

CASE NO. 1D An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. John J. Lazzara, Judge.

2015 IL App (5th) U NO IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

IN THE CIRCUIT FOR THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA APPELLATE DIVISION

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2005

CASE NO. 1D Karusha Y. Sharpe, John K. Londot and M. Hope Keating, of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. Tallahassee, for Appellee.

No. 70,689. [April 28, 19881

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA APPELLATE DIVISION

COURT OF APPEALS KNOX COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Iuuance Co,, [April 26, vs. No. 74,275. MICHAEL MANFREDO, Petitioner,

Appeal Bonds, Sureties, and Stays

Transcription:

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA JACKSON NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED v. Appellant, CASE NO. 1D08-2536 CORA JOY LOVALLO, Appellee. / Opinion filed May 4, 2009. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County. R. V. Swanson and Thomas R. Santurri, Judges. Hala Sandridge of Fowler, White, Boggs, Banker, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant. Thomas C. Staples of Staples, Ellis & Associates, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellee. BENTON, J. On motion for summary judgment, the trial judge ruled that Cora Joy Lovallo was, by virtue of a dissolution decree, the equitable owner of a ten-year, renewable, term life insurance policy her former husband purchased from Jackson

National Life Insurance Company and, for that reason, individually entitled to notice, as the end of the original term approached, of her right to renew the policy. 1 Ms. Lovallo became the equitable owner of the policy, the trial judge concluded, as a result of the decree incorporating the terms of the marital settlement agreement she entered into with her former husband; and she so advised Jackson National before the policy expired. We assume without deciding that the trial judge ruled correctly that Ms. Lovallo has all the rights of any owner of the policy. See Dixon v. Dixon, 184 So. 2d 478, 481 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966) ( We hold that the terms of the stipulation were so encompassing as to amount to a surrender of the essential incidents of ownership. If a person may make a parole gift of his policy ownership, a fortiori he may, by written stipulation concurrent with the bargaining inherent in a divorce settlement, similarly divest himself of his ownership interest in an insurance policy. ); Primerica Life Ins. Co. v. Moore, 2008 WL 1886032, at *4 (M. D. Fla. Apr. 28, 2008) ( [T]he Moore divorce decree... divested Joe Moore of his ownership of the life insurance policy and created an indefeasible interest in the proceeds of the life insurance policy in [his three daughters]. ); Metro. Life Ins. 1 After the expiration of the initial ten-year term, the policy could have been renewed, but the premiums would have increased dramatically. The former husband was aware of the right to renew the policy, but instructed the company not to renew it, some months before his demise. 2

Co. v. Williams, 82 F. Supp. 2d 1346, 1353 (M.D. Fla. 1999) ( Just as in Dixon, the terms of the Agreement, adopted and incorporated into the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage..., were so encompassing as to amount to a surrender of the essential incidents of ownership. (quoting Dixon, 184 So. 2d at 481)); Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Boyd, 781 F.2d 1494, 1497 (11th Cir. 1986) ( This Court is required by Dixon to hold that, by the terms of his divorce decree, Daniel Boyd was divested of his ownership of the proceeds of his life insurance policy with Prudential. ); Pensyl v. Moore, 415 So. 2d 771, 772 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (affirming based on Dixon in an almost identical case). The trial court also ruled, however, that, as an owner of the policy which we assume she was, for purposes of decision Ms. Lovallo was entitled to additional notice of the right to renew the policy, shortly before the time to renew expired. But the terms of the policy confer no right to any notice apart from the language of the policy itself of an owner s right to secure additional coverage after the initial ten-year term expires. Nor is such a right conferred by statute, even though statutes do confer a right to notice of the renewal premium (or notice of nonrenewal) for other kinds of insurance policies. 2 2 See 627.728(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2008) ( No insurer shall fail to renew a [motor vehicle insurance] policy unless it mails or delivers to the named insured, at the address shown in the policy, and to the named insured s insurance agent at her 3

We are concerned here with the right to renew, not with simple non-payment of premiums. Section 627.4555, Florida Statutes (2008), which requires issuers of life insurance policies to notify policy holders of the nonpayment of premiums, only applies, moreover, to policies issued on or after October 1, 1997, and thus has no application to the policy in dispute here, which was issued in 1994. There being no contractual, statutory, or common law basis upon which an owner of a renewable, term life insurance policy is entitled to receive notice of the right to renew beyond the notice in the policy itself, we are constrained to reverse the summary judgment entered below. We are not persuaded by Ms. Lovallo s argument that, because premiums were paid during the original term by electronic funds transfers, the common law required additional notice of the right to renew the policy. or his business address, at least 45 days advance notice of its intention not to renew; and the reasons for refusal to renew must accompany such notice. ); 627.4133(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2008) ( An insurer issuing a policy providing coverage for workers compensation and employer s liability insurance, property, casualty, except mortgage guaranty, surety, or marine insurance, other than motor vehicle insurance subject to s. 627.728, shall give the named insured at least 45 days advance written notice of nonrenewal or of the renewal premium. ). The principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius, which means the mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another, Rotemi Realty, Inc. v. Act Realty Co., 911 So. 2d 1181, 1187 (Fla. 2005) (citing Grenitz v. Tomlian, 858 So. 2d 999, 1002 (Fla. 2003)), supports the conclusion that the Florida Legislature did not intend to obligate life insurance carriers to provide notice of the right to renew to holders of term life insurance policies. 4

No other question is before us and we decide no other question in the case. We express no view, for example, on whether any communication between the parties constituted a request for renewal of the policy, or imposed any duty on Jackson National to seek clarification. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. WOLF and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR. 5