Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1979

Alejano v. HARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEM.

Alejano v. HARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEM.
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided December 28, 1979 · Pearson and Hubbart, Jj., and Chappell, Bill G., Associate Judge
378 So. 2d 104; 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 16238 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Alejano v. HARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEM.

Opinion

378 So.2d 104 (1979)

Pedro ALEJANO, Appellant,
v.
HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 79-437.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

December 28, 1979.

*105 Kuvin, Klingensmith & Lewis and R. Fred Lewis, Genden & Bach, Miami, for appellant.

Talburt, Kubicki & Bradley and Betsey E. Hartley, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON and HUBBART, JJ., and CHAPPELL, BILL G., Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

The final judgment appealed from is affirmed upon a holding that (a) an insurance company has no duty to explain uninsured motorist coverage to an insurance applicant unless the applicant asks for an explanation; Lopez v. Midwest Mutual Insurance Company, 223 So.2d 550 (Fla.3d DCA 1969); Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Yates, 368 So.2d 634 (Fla.2d DCA 1979); and (b) a party who signs his name to an instrument cannot deny its contents on the ground that he signed it without reading it unless he shows facts indicating circumstances which prevented his reading it. All Florida Surety Co. v. Coker, 88 So.2d 508 (Fla. 1956); Allied Van Lines, Inc. v. Bratton, 351 So.2d 344 (Fla. 1977). See also Sutton v. Crane, 101 So.2d 823, 825 (Fla.2d DCA 1958).

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.