CELERINA NUNEZ, Appellant, v. UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D19-1614. L.T. Case Nos. 16-1435 & 16-1284. March 10, 2021. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Michael A. Hanzman, Judge. Counsel: Giasi Law, P.A., and Melissa A. Giasi and Erin M. Berger (Tampa), for appellant. Link & Read More »
Articles
Torts — Proposal for settlement — Validity — Defendant accepting plaintiffs’ joint settlement proposal after one of the plaintiffs accepted defendant’s individual offer to settle — Trial court erred in granting defendant’s motion to enforce settlement agreement — Since plaintiff accepted defendant’s offer prior to defendant accepting plaintiffs’ offer, defendant would not have been able to fulfill her obligations under the specific terms of the plaintiffs’ offer — Because defendant could not fulfill all her obligations under the plaintiffs’ offer, the offer was no longer valid
46 Fla. L. Weekly D547a KAREN KETTERLING and PARKER KETTERLING, Appellants, v. VIRGINIA M. MORRIS, Appellee. 1st District. Case No. 1D20-37. March 10, 2021. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County. John Jay Gontarek, Judge. Counsel: Mark J. Upton of Daniell, Upton & Perry, P.C., Spanish Fort, AL; Isaac R. Ruiz-Carus and Katherine Read More »
Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Limitation of liability for “each accident” — Insured struck by phantom vehicle on interstate highway and then struck by uninsured motorist — Trial court did not err in instructing jury that multiple impacts can constitute one accident if there is one proximate, continuing cause of injury
46 Fla. L. Weekly D540a FLANIA BELT, Appellant, v. USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY Appellee. 4th District. Case No. 4D20-339. March 10, 2021. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; James Nutt, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2016-CA-010153-XXXX-MB. Counsel: William T. Viergever of Lytal Reiter Smith Ivey & Fronrath, West Palm Read More »
Insurance — Homeowners — Insured’s post-loss obligations — Failure to attend examination under oath — Trial court erred by granting insurer’s motion for directed verdict on issue of whether insured materially breached insurance contract by failing to attend EUO — For an insurer to establish a coverage defense based upon an insured’s failure to satisfy post-loss obligations such that the insured forfeits coverage under the policy, insurer must plead and prove that insured materially breached a post-loss policy provision — If insurer establishes such a material breach by insured, burden then shifts to insured to prove that any breach did not prejudice insurer — New trial required at which factfinder can determine whether insurer proved that insured’s failure to attend EUO was a material breach of the contract and, if so, whether insured then proved that this material breach did not prejudice insurer
46 Fla. L. Weekly D528a CELERINA NUNEZ, Appellant, v. UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D19-1614. L.T. Case Nos. 16-1435 & 16-1284. March 10, 2021. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Michael A. Hanzman, Judge. Counsel: Giasi Law, P.A., and Melissa A. Giasi and Erin M. Berger Read More »
Torts — Automobile accident — Dram Shop Act — Arbitration — Damages — Setoff — Trial court did not err by setting off against the arbitration award the amounts plaintiff recovered pursuant to settlement agreements with two derivatively liable establishments who served defendant alcohol on the day of the accident — Enforcement of the statutory setoff requirement after the deadline for the parties to request a trial de novo neither abrogated the arbitration statute nor unduly prejudiced plaintiff — While the trial court lacked discretion to alter the decision of the arbitrator, the decision of the arbitrator in this case did not encompass the liability of released third parties whose settlement payments defendant had a statutory right to set off from the award entered against him for the same damages — Additionally, while arbitration statute does require the trial court to enter an executable judgment in accordance with the arbitrator’s decision, the statutory text does not support plaintiff’s insinuation that there is no adjudicatory work to be done by the trial court after it receives the decision — Court rejects argument that plaintiff was improperly deprived of notice that arbitration award could be reduced by future settlement with third party at the time he was required to make the decision whether or not to request a trial because notice is provided by two separate statutes that require a trial court to set off the amount of settlements paid by released parties — Plaintiff was not prejudiced in his ability to present his case
46 Fla. L. Weekly D521a KENNETH IRVIN, JR., Appellant, v. LJ’S PACKAGE & LOUNGE INC. d/b/a LJ’S LOUNGE and KENNETH R. SALLADAY, Appellees. 2nd District. Case No. 2D19-2889. March 10, 2021. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee County; Alane Laboda, Judge. Counsel: Dan R. Stengle of Associates & Bruce L. Scheiner, Fort Myers, for Read More »