State Farm Insurance Company had issued a policy to the Walkers. The policy included an insurance limit for personal property of $107,250. The insured's home was burglarized and the Walkers submitted a claim that included the loss of more than $45,000 worth of rare coins. State Farm only paid them $200 for the coin loss, relying on their policy's special limit of liability. It limited recovery to a maximum of $200 for money, coins, bank notes, and medals.

The Walkers sued the insurer for breach of contract as the coins were rare collector's items which, in their opinion, fell outside of the special limitation. State Farm filed a motion for a summary judgment and the trial court, finding the policy language to be clear, granted one in the insurer's favor.

Upon appeal the insureds claimed that the section of the policy on special limits of liability was ambiguous. Their argument was that the policy's wording was confusing. In their opinion, the policy's reference to coins was unclear about whether it meant currency (for exchanges or transactions) or collector's items. If the former, then the special limit of liability would not apply to the loss.

The appellate court was not impressed with the appellants' argument as it found the policy language to be clear. The court pointed out that the policy's special limit of liability wording referred to money, medals, bank notes and coins and that the language did not lead one to believe that a distinction regarding coins should exist. The lower court's decision was affirmed in favor of the insurer.

Bryant H. Walker et ux., Appellants v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, Appellee. FlaDistCtApp. No. 4D99-0712. Filed April 19, 2000. Affirmed CCH 2000 Fire and Casualty Cases, Paragraph 6695.