MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY OF FLORIDA v. ASHLEY COATNEY, as personal representative of THE ESTATE OF CEASAR L. COATNEY, DECEASED, WILLIAM H. MOODY, SR., and MARGARET MOODY
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
MERCURY INSURANCE
COMPANY OF FLORIDA,
Appellant,
v.
CASE NO. 1D04-0683
ASHLEY COATNEY, as personal
representative of THE ESTATE OF
CEASAR L. COATNEY, DECEASED,
WILLIAM H. MOODY, SR., and
MARGARET MOODY,
Appellees.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed August 16, 2005.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County.
Judy Pittman, Judge.
Mark J. Upton of Daniell, Upton, Perry & Morris, P.A., Daphne, Alabama, for
Appellant.
Randle D. Thompson of Kerrigan, Estess, Rankin, McLeod & Thompson, LLP,
Pensacola, for Appellees William H. Moody, Sr., and Margaret Moody.
John Fishel of Boggs & Fishel, Panama City, for Appellee Ashley Coatney.
Louis K. Rosenbloum of Louis K. Rosenbloum, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellees.
ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING OR CLARIFICATION
PER CURIAM.
Pursuant to the respective parties’ motions for clarification, and appellant’s
motion for rehearing, we withdraw the opinion issued in this cause on June 7, 2005,
and substitute the following in its place. We deny appellant’s motion for rehearing,
but grant the motions for clarification.
This is an appeal from a declaratory judgment in which the trial court ruled that
an exclusion in an automobile-liability insurance policy for any loss caused while the
insured is committing or attempting to commit a felony was void as against public
policy, pursuant to Allstate Indemnity Co. v. Wise, 818 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 2d DCA
2001). Appellant, Mercury Insurance Company of Florida (Mercury), also appeals an
award of attorney’s fees1 to appellees, William H. Moody, Sr., and Margaret Moody.
Mercury concedes that if we affirm the declaratory judgment, the lower court’s
assessment of fees as to Ashley Coatney pursuant to section 627.428(1), Florida
Statutes (2002), was proper, but objects to the award of fees to William H. Moody,
Sr., and Margaret Moody.
Notwithstanding appellees’ agreement with the position taken by Mercury with
respect to the award of section 57.105 attorney’s fees, we conclude the trial court
1
Entered pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2002).
2
properly exercised its discretion in this regard. In ruling on the declaratory judgment
action, the trial court found the issue presented was controlled by the opinion in
Allstate. We agree. In the absence of a supreme court decision on point, the trial
court is bound to follow decisions of the district courts of appeal, and where there is
no district court decision on point from the district court for the subject circuit, the
trial court is bound to follow precedents of other district courts of appeal. See Pardo
v. State, 596 So. 2d 665, 666-67 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Since there was no decision
from this court on point, the trial court was required to follow the second district
decision in Allstate in ruling on the declaratory judgment action. We therefore
conclude the trial court properly awarded an attorney’s fee pursuant to section 57.105,
Florida Statutes (2002), to appellees William H. Moody, Sr., and Margaret Moody.
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the declaratory judgment, based on the rationale of
Wise, and similarly AFFIRM the fee award.
ERVIN, DAVIS and HAWKES, JJ., CONCUR.
3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
