Legal Opinion · Dissent

Twin City Fire Insurance v. Rudolph

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 25, 1999No. 99-786Published

1DissentHarris, J.

The issue before us on this Petition for Writ of Mandamus is whether the trial judge can refuse, when considering an action for declaratory judgment, to determine the insurer’s duty to indemnify when such decision is critical to the insurer’s duty to defend. The trial judge stated:

I’m not sure how [language of the policy] fits in there. I, but certainly on the face of it does not exclude coverage, the duty to defend. And it doesn’t — at this point that’s all I would be willing to say, because I don’t think I really need to, I don’t think I really need to say whether [Twin City] is responsible…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. NailDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
  2. Int'l Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. MarkhamDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
  3. TIG Ins. Co. v. WagnerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API