12 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1071a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Where policy language regarding additional personal injury protection is ambiguous, language will be construed liberally in favor of insured and strictly against insurer — Coverage clauses are construed in broadest possible manner to effect greatest extent of coverage — Post-suit payment of disputed bill is functional equivalent of confession of judgment or verdict in insured’s favor — Insured’s motion for summary judgment is granted
EDWARD D. LEWIS, JR., Plaintiff, vs. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 4th Judicial Circuit in and for Duval County, Small Claims Court. Case No. 16-2004-SC-003953, Division N. July 28, 2005, nunc pro tunc to June 8, 2005. Gary P. Flower, Judge. Counsel: Nicholas J. Christopolis. David G. Candelaria, Farah & Farah, P.A., Jacksonville.ORDER
THIS CAUSE coming before the Court sub judice on “Plaintiff’s Motion For Final Summary Judgment — Summary Disposition” and “Defendant’s Counter Motion For Final Summary Disposition,” and after considering argument of counsel and relevant Florida Law, makes the following findings of facts and conclusions of law:
1. The Court finds the policy language in regard to “Additional Personal Injury Protection” ambiguous and subject to differing interpretations. Pursuant to Florida Law, the Court will construe the language of the policy liberally in favor of the Plaintiff and strictly against the insurer.
2. The coverage clauses of the policy will be construed in the broadest possible manner to effect the greatest extent of coverage, and this Court finds the Plaintiff covered for Ten Thousand dollars ($10,000) in Personal Injury Protection Benefits and Twenty Thousand dollars ($20,000) in “Additional Personal Injury Protection benefits.”
3. Defendant has agreed to pay a disputed bill for which is the subject matter of this litigation, after this suit was filed. Defendant has declined to defend its position and the payment issued after litigation commenced is the functional equivalent of a confession of judgment or a verdict in favor of plaintiff.
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
4. Plaintiff’s “Motion For Final Summary Judgment — Summary Disposition” is GRANTED.
5. Defendant’s “Counter Motion For Final Summary Disposition” is DENIED.
6. This Court reserves jurisdiction to enforce this Final Judgment, as well as any previous Judgements and/or Orders in this matter, and to do any and all other acts necessary in this cause.
7. The court shall reserve jurisdiction for entry of a final judgment as to attorney’s fees and costs.
* * *
