Abbey Adams Logo

Defending Liability, Workers' Compensation, Employment Claims and Appeals Since 1982

  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

  • Bloglovin
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Phone
  • Home
  • Locations
    • Where We Practice in Florida
    • Where We Practice In Illinois
  • Practices
  • Attorneys
    • David J. Abbey
    • Jeffrey M. Adams
    • Bruce D. Burk
    • Robert P. Byelick
    • Jaime Eagan
    • Jennifer J. Kennedy
    • John D. Kiernan (1947-2016)
    • V. Joseph Mueller
    • Steven A. Ochsner
    • Alexis C. Upton
  • Blog
  • Links
  • Contact Us

March 8, 2019 by Jennifer Kennedy

Insurance — Appraisal — Trial court did not err by compelling appraisal prior to determining if insurer was wholly denying coverage where insurer admitted there was a covered loss by tendering check for its estimation of damage and choosing appraisal as appropriate resolution forum

44 Fla. L. Weekly D659a

Insurance — Appraisal — Trial court did not err by compelling appraisal prior to determining if insurer was wholly denying coverage where insurer admitted there was a covered loss by tendering check for its estimation of damage and choosing appraisal as appropriate resolution forum

MKL ENTERPRISES LLC, d/b/a DRIMAXX, Appellant, v. AMERICAN TRADITIONS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 1st District. Case No. 1D17-2632. March 7, 2019. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Tatiana Salvador, Judge. Counsel: Corinne L. Heller, Jacksonville, for Appellant. Thomas R. Diana and William R. Burke of Zinober Diana, P.A., St. Petersburg; Dorothy V. DiFiore and Karen Shimonsky of Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee.

(M.K. THOMAS, J.) MKL Enterprises LLC (“DriMaxx”) appeals an order granting American Traditions Insurance Company’s (“ATIC”) motion to compel appraisal and abate litigation. DriMaxx argues the trial court erred by compelling appraisal prior to making a determination of whether an enforceable agreement exists and if ATIC is “wholly denying” coverage under the homeowner’s insurance policy. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

The standard of review applicable to an order compelling appraisal under an insurance policy is de novo. Fortune v. Gulf Coast Tree Care Inc., 148 So. 3d 827, 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Ashe, 50 So. 3d 645, 650 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).

Generally, “ ‘[a]ppraisal clauses are preferred, as they provide a mechanism for prompt resolution of claims and discourage the filing of needless lawsuits.’ ” First Protective Ins. Co. v. Hess, 81 So. 3d 482, 485 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (quoting Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, Inc. v. Olympus Ass’n, Inc., 34 So. 3d 791, 794 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)). Appraisals are appropriate where an insurance company “admits that there is a covered loss, but there is a disagreement on the amount of loss.” Johnson v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 828 So. 2d 1021, 1025 (Fla. 2002) (emphasis in original). By tendering the check, ATIC admitted coverage for some damage while declining to cover all repair costs. Thus, ATIC did not “wholly deny” coverage. See People’s Trust Ins. Co. v. Tracey, 251 So. 3d 931, 933 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018).

Here, ATIC, the insurer, tendered a check for its estimation of covered damage. In so doing, ATIC thereby “waives any coverage defense it might otherwise have had.” Scottsdale, 666 So. 2d at 947. Furthermore, in choosing appraisal as the appropriate resolution forum, ATIC “admits that there is a covered loss.” Johnson, 828 So. 2d at 1025.

The order of the trial court compelling appraisal is AFFIRMED. (B.L. THOMAS, C.J. and, JAY, J. concur.)

* * *

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Primary Sidebar

Blog Archives

  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013

Footer

The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney. opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index

Copyright © 2021 · Abbey Adams Byelick & Mueller, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Defending Liability, Workers' Compensation, Employment Claims and Appeals Since 1982