Opinion ID: 1822610
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Plain Meaning of Federal's Policy

Text: We now examine the policy language at issue: with respect to liability because of acts or omissions of the named insured. Two phrases are particularly relevant: with respect to, and because of. When interpreting insurance contracts, we may consult references commonly relied upon to supply the accepted meanings of words. See Gov't Employees Ins. Co. v. Novak, 453 So.2d 1116, 1118 (Fla.1984) (citing Webster's Third New International Dictionary 11 (1966) to define accident); Beans v. Chohonis, 740 So.2d 65, 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (One looks to the dictionary for the plain and ordinary meaning of words.). The phrase with respect to is defined as concerning. Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 997 (10th ed.1993). The phrase because of is defined as by reason of. Id. at 101. When considered in context, these words clearly indicate that an additional insured is only entitled to coverage concerning liability that is caused by or occurs by reason of acts or omissions of the named insured. An additional insured's liability thus must be caused by the acts or omissionsthat is, the negligenceof the named insured. The policy does not cover an additional insured's liability arising from her own negligent acts. Because the accident victim sued Garcia for her own negligence in failing to maintain the brake pedal, and did not allege that Garcia was liable for Anderson's acts or omissions, Garcia is not entitled to coverage.