Court Opinion

ID: 9415259
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 18:41:20.614842+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:21:10.043955
License: Public Domain

COX, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
The district court concluded that Key had demonstrated an intention not to insure her Ford Fiesta with Allstate, but rather to insure it with Underwriters. The court found that Key had stated that she chose to have insurance with one company for one car and with another company for another car because she thought it would be cheaper.
The district court understood Florida law to hold that the intent of the insured is controlling under circumstances such as these, citing Pennsylvania Nat’l Mutual Casualty Ins. Co. v. Ritz, 284 So.2d 474 (Fla. 3 DCA 1973). My understanding of Florida law is the same as that of the district court. I would affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s well-reasoned memorandum opinion.