Vigilant Ins. Co. v. Kelps

How courts have described this case

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

• holding it 2 Ascendant’s insurance policy language does not impose a condition precedent to filing suit. 6 is the trial court that must first determine the insurance status of the tortfeasor
• it is well settled that issues concerning the existence of coverage may be determined only by the court, and, conversely may not be a subject of the arbitration process
• “[N]o UM coverage exists if the offending motorist is not actually un- or underin-sured.” (citing Hayston v. Allstate Ins. Co., 290 So.2d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974))
• “[N]o UM coverage exists if the offending motorist is not actually un-or underinsured.” (citing Hayston v. Allstate Ins. Co., 290 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974))
• question of whether second vehicle was hit-and-run or otherwise uninsured

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).