6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 396c
Insurance — Homeowners — Subrogation — Insurer seeking to recover from manufacturer of air conditioning unit and local servicing and maintenance company the amounts it paid to its insured as result of damage caused by leaking unit — Trial court properly entered summary judgment in favor of manufacturer where there was no evidence that manufacturer was negligent, and insurer’s investigation resulted in specific determination that responsibilities for the occurrence lay solely with installer
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY as Subrogee of HERBERT WIEDER and FANNY WIEDER, Appellant, vs. RHEEM MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellee. 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Appellate Division. Case No. 97-080 AP. Opinion filed February 26, 1999. An appeal from The County Court of Miami-Dade County, Florida (Honorable Michael Samuels). Counsel: Susan M. Ludovici, for appellant. Daniel L. Koch and Kevin Kerrigan, for appellee.
(Before PHILIP BLOOM, STANFORD BLAKE, and ROBERTO M. PINEIRO, JJ.)
(PHILIP BLOOM, J.) THIS CAUSE came before the Court on the appeal of Allstate Insurance Company as subrogee of Herbert Wieder and Fanny Wieder, homeowners of a house in which an air conditioning unit was installed. That unit leaked and caused extensive damage to the Wieder property; the insurance company paid the Wieders for their loss and here seeks subrogation for loss from the manufacturer of the air conditioner, Rheem, and from Always Available, the local servicing and maintenance company.
As between Allstate Insurance Company and Rheem, the entry of summary judgment on the merits in behalf of Rheem, was proper. Appellant had no evidence to show that Rheem was negligent. Allstate Insurance Company conducted an extensive investigation which did not show any negligence by Rheem. To the contrary, Allstate Insurance Company specifically determined that: “Responsibilities for the loss occurrence lies solely on the installer who was identified as Always Available” (the local servicing and maintenance company).
Additionally, we are unable to find one scintilla of any admissible evidence in the Original Record below to indicate any negligence on the part of Rheem. The Record is devoid of any deposition, opposing affidavit or other indication favorable to Appellant’s position. Accordingly, the Order of The County Court granting summary judgment is AFFIRMED. The Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss Appellant’s Appeal for the alleged failure to timely serve the initial brief is DENIED. (STANFORD BLAKE and ROBERTO M. PINEIRO, JJ., Concur.)
* * *
