Per Curiam.
In this appeal from a final summary judgment, Appellants claim that the trial court erred in determining that they were not entitled to non-stacked uninsured motorist (UM) benefits under their policy with Appellee where they accepted stacked UM benefits under their policy with another insurer. We affirm because the trial court properly interpreted...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.