dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. I would hold that the trial court correctly applied Quick v. National Indemnity Co., 231 So.2d 22 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970), in entering summary judgment for appellee. The distinctions between the instant case and Quick, as cited in the majority opinion, do not, in my view, warrant ignoring the rule of law set forth in Quick vis-a-vis discrepancies between the application and the printed policy.
I would affirm.