Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Coverage — Plaintiff seeking coverage from her automobile insurer for injuries plaintiff suffered while training in the back of a truck that operated a mobile gym — No error in granting summary judgment in favor of insurer because mobile gym was not an uninsured auto within the meaning of plaintiff’s policy — Policy clearly and unequivocally provided that a vehicle located for use as a premises is not an uninsured auto, and truck was being used as a premises when negligence occurred where clients worked out in mobile gym only when it was stationary, parked, and connected to a power source, and never worked out when gym was being driven as a vehicle
44 Fla. L. Weekly D2639a
The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.
opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index