8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 197a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Insurer’s right of reimbursement against insurer or owner of commercial motor vehicle — 1991 Ford sedan driven by plaintiff, though being used as taxi cab, is not commercial vehicle as defined in Section 627.732, Florida Statutes, and thus insurer is not entitled to reimbursement pursuant to Section 627.7405, Florida Statutes
MICHAEL J. DAVIS and LAURA DAVIS, Plaintiff(s), vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant(s)/Third Party Plaintiff, vs. CAM-JO, INC., Third Party Defendant. County Court, 6th Judicial Circuit in and for Pasco County, Civil Division. Case No. 99-777CC, Division U. June 30, 2000. Marc H. Salton, Judge. Counsel: Michael Reeser, Palm Harbor. Michael Ashy, Tampa. Eddy R. Resnick, Tampa.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The Third-Party Defendant, CAM-JO, INC., has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment alleging that the 1991 Ford motor vehicle, which was being driven by the Plaintiff, MICHAEL DAVIS, was a sedan and thus not a commercial vehicle as defined by Florida Statute 627.732. The Court finds that the 1991 Ford sedan being driven by Plaintiff, MICHAEL DAVIS, was being operated as a taxi cab. Florida Statute 627.732 defines a private passenger motor vehicle as a sedan, station wagon, or jeep-type vehicle, and makes no distinction regarding the use of such vehicle. In fact, the legislature removed language previously contained in this subsection that defined a private passenger vehicle as a sedan so long as it was not
used as a public or livery conveyance for passengers.
The Court therefore finds that the 1991 Ford sedan, though being used as a taxi cab, is not a commercial vehicle as defined in Florida Statute 627.732 and thus the Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY, is not entitled to reimbursement pursuant to Florida Statute 627.7405 and grants summary judgment in favor of Third-Party Defendant, CAM-JO, INC.
* * *
