John Rando, Appellants v. Government Employees Insurance Company, Appellee

Summary

The Court answered the certified question in the negative, holding that Florida law governs the policy because it was executed, issued, and delivered in Florida and that the policy's anti-stacking provision is unenforceable without the insureds' informed consent. The informed-consent requirement applies even though the covered vehicle was registered and principally garaged outside Florida. Justice Canady, dissenting, would have limited the statutory requirement to vehicles within the statute's registration or garaging provision, while Justice Polston, dissenting, would have answered the question affirmatively as phrased but agreed that informed consent was required for a Florida-law-controlled policy.