28 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C1086a Insurance — Commercial automobile liability — Coverage — Insurer of truck that collided with two vehicles, one immediately after the other, when driver crossed the center line sought declaration of its obligations under two insurance policies issued to driver’s employer and owner of the truck and policy issued to Read More »
Archives for May 2020
Insurance — Contractors — Insurer had no duty to defend construction company in action alleging that company’s employee or agent caused damage to condominium building where the damage occurred above the third story of the condominium building, and the policy contained an exclusion for construction damage to a building more than three stories in height
45 Fla. L. Weekly D1152a Insurance — Contractors — Insurer had no duty to defend construction company in action alleging that company’s employee or agent caused damage to condominium building where the damage occurred above the third story of the condominium building, and the policy contained an exclusion for construction damage to a building more Read More »
Insurance — Homeowners — All risk policy — Concurrent cause doctrine — Where water damage to insured home was caused by water entering home through walls and windows, an excluded cause, and by water entering through door, a cause which was not excluded, trial court erred in granting directed verdict in favor of insured on basis of concurrent cause doctrine because policy contained an anti-concurrent cause provision — Because evidence of water entering through the walls and windows was undisputed and expressly excluded by policy, entire loss is excluded from coverage due to anti-concurrent cause provision
45 Fla. L. Weekly D1151b Insurance — Homeowners — All risk policy — Concurrent cause doctrine — Where water damage to insured home was caused by water entering home through walls and windows, an excluded cause, and by water entering through door, a cause which was not excluded, trial court erred in granting directed verdict Read More »
Insurance — Homeowners — Appraisal pursuant to appraisal provision in Preferred Contractor Endorsement — Waiver — Insurer did not waive right to compel appraisal by not invoking its appraisal right as an affirmative defense to insured’s breach of contract action where insurer, in the same pleading containing affirmative defenses, asserted counterclaims seeking insureds’ compliance with appraisal provision — Insurer did not waive right to compel appraisal because its counterclaim sought to void policy because of insureds’ refusal to participate in appraisal — Party will not be deemed to have waived appraisal unless party’s litigation position is inconsistent with party’s assertion of right to appraisal — Demand for appraisal was not untimely where insurer sent insureds letter demanding appraisal before it had notice of insureds’ lawsuit — Remand for trial court to reconsider insurer’s motion to compel appraisal and to determine order in which coverage issues and appraisal are determined
45 Fla. L. Weekly D1149a Insurance — Homeowners — Appraisal pursuant to appraisal provision in Preferred Contractor Endorsement — Waiver — Insurer did not waive right to compel appraisal by not invoking its appraisal right as an affirmative defense to insured’s breach of contract action where insurer, in the same pleading containing affirmative defenses, asserted Read More »
Wrongful death — Automobile accident — Tractor-trailer accident involving multiple vehicles and resulting in several bodily injury and wrongful death claims — Intervention — Excess insurer for employer of driver who recklessly operated tractor-trailer seeking to intervene for purpose of distributing $10, which it contends is the extent of available insurance coverage after settlement of other claims — Trial court applied proper standard when it examined whether excess insurer’s asserted interest was appropriate for intervention and did not abuse discretion by denying intervention after concluding that it was not — Excess insurer’s interest in distributing its remaining insurance proceeds was not appropriate to support intervention because it was not an interest in the matter of litigation and was not of such a direct and immediate character that insurer would gain or lose by the direct operation of the judgment — Record makes it clear that it is only the continuation of the proceeding that affects insurer because it is paying for insured’s defense pursuant to terms of policy — Discussion of two-step analysis applicable when ruling on motion to intervene
45 Fla. L. Weekly D1128b Wrongful death — Automobile accident — Tractor-trailer accident involving multiple vehicles and resulting in several bodily injury and wrongful death claims — Intervention — Excess insurer for employer of driver who recklessly operated tractor-trailer seeking to intervene for purpose of distributing $10, which it contends is the extent of available Read More »