Case Name: David J. HANCOCK, et al., Appellants, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1993-07-20
Citations: 623 So. 2d 536
Docket Number: Nos. 92-1054, 92-1058
Parties: David J. HANCOCK, et al., Appellants, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellee.
Judges: Before BASKIN, JORGENSON and COPE, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 623
Pages: 536–536

Head Matter:
David J. HANCOCK, et al., Appellants, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellee.
Nos. 92-1054, 92-1058.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
July 20, 1993.
Rehearing Denied Sept. 21, 1993.
Thomson Muraro Razook & Hart and Steven W. Davis and Scott A. Browdy, Miami, Paul Morris, Coral Gables, for appellants.
Walton Lantaff Schroeder & Carson and Robert L. Teitler, Miami, for appellee.
Before BASKIN, JORGENSON and COPE, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Notwithstanding the fact that the declaratory judgment action was improperly entertained, see Bergh v. Canadian Universal Ins. Co., 216 So.2d 436 (Fla.1968); Columbia Casualty v. Zimmerman, 62 So.2d 338 (Fla.1952), the fact finder considered the counterclaim on the merits and found that Hancock wilfully and intentionally threw the glass into Ginelli's face. We affirm based on Prudential Property & Casualty Ins. v. Swindal, 622 So.2d 467 (Fla.1993) and Landis v. Allstate Ins. Co., 546 So.2d 1051 (Fla.1989). See also AIU Ins. Co. v. Block Marina Investment, Inc., 544 So.2d 998 (Fla.1989).
Affirmed.