Natalie S. DEUTSCH, Appellant,
GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit,
Palm Beach County; James Nutt and Cymonie Rowe, Judges; L.T.
Case No. 50-2014-CA-013774-XXXX-MB.
M. Burlington and Nichole J. Segal of Burlington &
Rockenbach, P.A., West Palm Beach, Roberta M. Deutsch of
Roberta M. Deutsch, LLC, Boca Raton, and Stuart F. Cohen of
Conroy Simberg Ganon Krevans & Abel PA, Hollywood, for
C. Degnan of Kubicki Draper, Orlando, for appellee.
defendants in the circuit court operated a mobile gym out of
the back of a truck. The plaintiff sued them for injuries she
suffered while training in the back of the truck. The issue
presented is whether the plaintiff may recover uninsured
motorist benefits under her policy with Geico General
Insurance Company. We hold that there is no coverage for her
loss and affirm the final judgment in favor of Geico.
Garrett Nodell owns and operates Mobile Fitness Centers of
America, Inc., a mobile gym that operates out of the back of
an Isuzu truck. To train his clients, Nodell drives the gym
to a clients location and conducts workouts in the back of
the truck. The gym is equipped with exercise machines and
equipment, some of which are bolted to the floor of the
truck. The gym is powered by either a generator or by Nodell
plugging into the clients electricity.
several years, Natalie Deutsch trained with Nodell. Her
training sessions took place in the back of the truck while
it was parked near her home and plugged into her homes
electricity. According to the complaint, as a result of
Nodells negligence during training, Deutsch suffered
Deutsch sued Nodell and Mobile Fitness Centers and those
suits were settled. She also sued Geico, her auto insurance
carrier, contending that the mobile gym was an
uninsured/underinsured auto under her policy.
relevant policy language providing coverage states that Geico
will pay damages for bodily injury caused by an accident
which the insured is legally entitled to recover from the
owner or operator of "an uninsured auto arising out of
the ownership, maintenance or use of that auto." The
term "uninsured auto," however, does not include
"a land motor vehicle ... located for use as a residence
or premises ...."
parties moved for summary judgment on the coverage issue.
Following a hearing, the circuit court granted Geicos motion
and denied Deutschs motion. The court found that the
"uninsured policy provisions clearly and unambiguously
define what an uninsured auto is and is not," and that
the "unambiguous policy provisions clearly exclude
coverage in the instant case." Ultimately, the circuit
court entered final judgment in favor of Geico.
MOBILE GYM WAS NOT AN UNINSURED AUTO UNDER THE POLICY BECAUSE