46 Fla. L. Weekly D584c GENET ARIZONE and VANA SIMON, Appellants, v. HOMEOWNERS CHOICE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Appellee. 2nd District. Case No. 2D18-1116. Opinion filed March 17, 2021. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee County; Keith R. Kyle, Judge. Counsel: Erin M. Berger and Melissa A. Giasi of Giasi Law, P.A., Read More »
Articles
Insurance — Homeowners — Appraisal — Trial court erred in denying insurer’s motion to compel appraisal — Because insurer did not wholly deny coverage, appraisal was appropriate and should not have been denied — Court rejects insured’s waiver and ripeness arguments — Insurer did all it needed to do before demanding appraisal and did not act inconsistently with its appraisal right
46 Fla. L. Weekly D582a CASTLE KEY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. MARK FISCHER, Appellee. 1st District. Case No. 1D20-1621. March 16, 2021. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County. Frances S. King, Judge. Counsel: Scot E. Samis of Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP, St. Petersburg; David Molhem of Molhem & Fraley, P.A., Read More »
Workers’ compensation — Insurance — Contractors — Coverage — Cancellation — Conditions precedent — Promissory estoppel — Judge of compensation claims did not err in concluding that claimant was not covered under employer/subcontractor’s workers’ compensation insurance policy because insurer had cancelled the policy for nonpayment prior to claimant’s accident — Court rejects argument that cancellation of policy was ineffective because policy contained a condition precedent allowing employer/subcontractor the opportunity to pay unpaid premiums before policy was cancelled — Provision of policy stating that the unpaid premium is immediately due and payable when payroll deduction is terminated or suspended for any reason was not a condition precedent because provision did not expressly condition cancellation on a second nonpayment — Policy’s only stated condition precedent to cancellation was ten days’ notice to policyholder, which insurer satisfied by mailing notice to employer/subcontractor’s last known address — Determination that insurer was not estopped from cancelling policy based on general contractor’s reliance on the certificate of liability insurance provided by employer/subcontractor is affirmed — Any error by JCC in focusing on the reasonableness of general contractor’s reliance on the COI is harmless because the JCC’s finding that any reliance by general contractor on the COI was not reasonable is supported by competent, substantial evidence and makes enforcement unnecessary to avoid injustice
46 Fla. L. Weekly D581a DENNIS F. SCOTT, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. JAMES A. JONES CONSTRUCTION CO., Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. CENTRAL FLORIDA SIDING PROS, LLC, NORGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY, SOUTHEAST PERSONNEL LEASING, INC., LION INSURANCE COMPANY, PACKARD CLAIMS, NOBLES AMERICAN SERVICES, LLC, Appellees/Cross-Appellees. 1st District. Case No. 1D20-689. March 16, 2021. On appeal from an order of the Office Read More »
Workers’ compensation — Costs — Prevailing party — Judge of compensation claims erred in denying claimant’s request for costs — Claimant was the prevailing party because the specific benefits requested were provided only after claimant filed the petitions for benefits
46 Fla. L. Weekly D612a AMER ALI, Appellant, v. AMERICAN AIRLINES and SEDGWICK CMS, Appellees. 1st District. Case No. 1D20-987. March 17, 2021. On appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Sylvia Medina-Shore, Judge. Date of Accidents: February 25, 2011; August 24, 2014. Counsel: Toni L. Villaverde of Toni L. Villaverde, PLLC, Read More »
Insurance — Homeowners — Condition precedent — Sworn proof of loss — Trial court erred in entering summary judgment in favor of insurer based on determination that insured’s sworn statements and proofs of loss did not provide information required under the policy — Insured was not required to utilize insurer’s proof of loss forms, and a review of the record shows that forms utilized by insured provided most, if not all, information regarding insured’s claim that was requested in insurer’s own forms, especially when considering each proof of loss was accompanied by an attached itemized repair estimate — Forms were not devoid of attachments as insurer represented, nor were they lacking in sufficient explanation of how insured arrived at the amount of her damages as the trial court found — Trial court erred in denying insured’s motion for rehearing which asserted that insurer failed to plead or set forth in written motions for summary judgment its claim that insured failed to provide repair estimates — Rule 1.120(c) requires that any denial of compliance with a condition precedent must be specific, and rule 1.510(c) requires a party moving for summary judgment to state the grounds upon which it relies with particularity — Furthermore, the parties had agreed that insured had submitted detailed repair estimate with each proof of loss
46 Fla. L. Weekly D555b ALEXANDRA LOPEZ, Appellant, v. AVATAR PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 5th District. Case No. 5D20-64. March 12, 2021. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Osceola County, Michael Murphy, Judge. Counsel: William D. Mueller, Elliot B. Kula, and W. Aaron Daniel, of Kula & Associates, P.A., Miami, for Appellant. Carol Read More »