Malu v. SECURITY NAT. INS. CO.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that automobile transportation expenses, such as those sought here, are not included in the Florida PIP statute

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Malu v. SECURITY NAT. INS. CO.
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2005-03-10· cited 15×
• Padilla v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-07-23· cited 6×
• DIRECT GENERAL INS. CO. v. Morris
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-10-15· cited 4×
• Padilla v. LIBERTY MUT.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2005-08-17· cited 3×
• Gaetan v. Geico Indemnity Co.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-07-02· cited 1×
• Schwartz v. USAA Casualty Insurance Co.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-07-28· cited 1×
• Gaetan v. GEICO Indemnity Co.
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2005-09-01· cited 1×
• Malu v. Security National Insurance Co.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2005-05-18

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1979-10-04· cited 1,882×
• Pardo v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1992-03-26· cited 289×
• Moonlit Waters Apartments, Inc. v. Cauley
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1996-01-25· cited 55×
• Mobley v. Jack & Son Plumbing
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1964-11-04· cited 18×
• Lewis v. Barnett Bank
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1992-09-22· cited 14×
• Hunter v. Allstate Ins. Co.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1986-11-13· cited 12×
• Sam's Club v. Bair
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1996-08-23· cited 10×
• Fish v. Post of Amvets No. 85
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1990-04-25· cited 7×