Case Name: STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Arthur W. NICKELSON and Melvinee Nickelson, individually and as parents and natural guardians of Nikki W. Nickelson, a minor, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-07-03
Citations: 677 So. 2d 37
Docket Number: No. 95-2510
Parties: STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Arthur W. NICKELSON and Melvinee Nickelson, individually and as parents and natural guardians of Nikki W. Nickelson, a minor, Appellees.
Judges: BENTON and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 677
Pages: 37–38

Head Matter:
STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Arthur W. NICKELSON and Melvinee Nickelson, individually and as parents and natural guardians of Nikki W. Nickelson, a minor, Appellees.
No. 95-2510.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
July 3, 1996.
Rehearing Denied July 31, 1996.
Charles B. Carter of Jones, Carter & Dry-lie, P.A., Gainesville, for appellant.
Ted C. Curtis, Gainesville; Alan E. MeMi-chael, Stripling, McMichael & Stripling, P.A., Gainesville, for appellees.

Opinion:
WOLF, Judge.
Appellant, State Farm Fire and Casualty (State Farm), seeks review of a jury verdict in a declaratory relief action. Appellees, the Nickelsons, requested a declaration of coverage under a homeowner's policy issued by State Farm to a third party in whose home their daughter, Nikki, was injured. The trial court denied State Farm's motion for summary judgment and directed verdict and submitted the issue of whether certain exclusions precluded coverage to the jury. We reverse.
Generally, interpretation of an insurance contract is a question of law to be decided by the trial court. Lee v. Montgomery, 624 So.2d 850 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Where, as here, the facts are essentially undisputed, whether those facts fit within the policy definition is a question of law that may be decided on appellate review. Row v. United Services Automobile Association, 474 So.2d 348, 349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Based on our careful reading of the policy and the facts of this ease, we find, as a matter of law, that coverage for the injury to Nikki Nickel-son was precluded under the child care exclusion.
We conclude that the trial court erred in submitting this issue to the jury. Accordingly the case is remanded with directions for the trial judge to enter judgment in favor of State Farm.
BENTON and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.