JEAN LOUIS v. PRAETORIAN INSURANCE COMPANY (2020)

Affirmed. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Orthopedic Specialists, 212 So. 3d 973, 975-76 (Fla. 2017) (quoting Washington Nat'l Ins. Corp. v. Ruderman, 117 So. 3d 943, 948 (Fla. 2013)) (“Where the language in an insurance contract is plain and unambiguous, a court must interpret the policy in accordance with the plain meaning so as to give effect to the policy as written.”); Ebanks v. Ebanks, 198 So. 3d 712, 715 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (quoting Gibney v. Pillifant, 32 So. 3d 784, 785 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)) (“[T]he actual language used in the contract is the best evidence of the intent of the parties, and the plain meaning of that language controls.”); Dingle v. Dellinger, 134 So. 3d 484, 488 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (A person is an intended third-party beneficiary to a contract “if the parties to the contract clearly express, or the contract itself expresses, an intent to primarily and directly benefit the third party or a class of persons to which that party claims to belong.”).

PER CURIAM.