[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
APR 21, 2010
No. 09-13108 JOHN LEY
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 08-22074-CV-JLK
MARK STAMMEL,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY,
a foreign corporation,
TOTAL DOLLAR MANAGEMENT EFFORT, LTD.,
a foreign corporation,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(April 21, 2010)
Before BLACK, BARKETT and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Mark Stammel appeals an adverse Summary Judgment in favor of Ace
American Insurance Company which had denied coverage to Stammel for the total
loss by fire and the sinking of his yacht. At the time of the casualty, the vessel was
insured by ACE, which denied coverage because the vessel was not equipped with
an automatic fire extinguishing system in the engine pursuant to the following
policy provision:
FIRE EXTINGUISHING AGREEMENT
You agree that your yacht is equipped with a built-in and
automatic system of fire extinguishing apparatus, properly
installed in the engine room and maintained in good and
efficient working order.
On appeal, Stammel argues: (1) that ACE is precluded from applying this
provision because the parties previously agreed that the Vessel was equipped
with an automatic system of fire extinguishing apparatus; (2) that the phrase
“automatic system of fire extinguishing apparatus” is ambiguous; and (3) ACE is
estopped from denying coverage because ACE knew the specific type of fire
equipment on board prior to binding coverage, never objected, and issued
insurance nevertheless.
Having reviewed the record and considered the argument of the parties, we
find no reversible error in the district court’s conclusion that the Fire Extinguishing
2
Agreement was not ambiguous, reasoning that the word “automatic” means
“without human intervention” and Stammel did not comply with the condition of
the policy as the system on his yacht required human activation.
AFFIRMED
3