47 Fla. L. Weekly D938a

HERITAGE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. FAIRWAY OAKS, INC., Appellee. 2nd District. Case No. 2D21-793. April 22, 2022. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Collier County; Hugh D. Hayes, Judge. Counsel: David A. Noel and Kara Rockenbach Link of Link & Rockenbach, P.A., West Palm Beach; and Jeffrey A. Rubinton and Veronica Dossat of Rubinton & Associates, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant. Sanjay Kurian and Benjamin T. Johnson of Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee.

(LUCAS, Judge.) Heritage Property & Casualty Insurance Company (Heritage) appeals the circuit court’s order compelling it to participate in an appraisal under its insurance policy with Fairway Oaks, Inc. (Fairway Oaks), a condominium association. Because the facts and arguments in this appeal essentially mirror what we recently addressed in Heritage Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Veranda I at Heritage Links Ass’n, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D513 (Fla. 2d DCA Feb. 25, 2022), we reverse the order below. Like the condominium association in Veranda, Fairway Oaks submitted a claim to its insurer, Heritage, due to roof damage sustained from Hurricane Irma. Like in Veranda, Fairway Oaks later submitted a supplemental claim for window and door damages it claimed had also been caused by the hurricane.¹ And, like in Veranda, Heritage eventually paid the roof claim but denied coverage as to the supplemental claim.

The circuit court granted Fairway Oaks’ motion to compel appraisal, and Heritage filed this timely appeal.

In Veranda, 47 Fla. L. Weekly at D514, we concluded that

[b]ecause Veranda’s claim for windows and doors was a supplemental claim for coverage, [American Coastal Insurance Co. v. Ironwood, Inc., 330 So. 3d 570, 573 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021),] instructs that we must consider that claim separately from the initial roof claim that had been fully adjusted. And since Heritage wholly denied coverage for that supplemental claim, [Johnson v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., 828 So. 2d 1021, 1022 (Fla. 2002),] and its progeny precluded the trial court from referring it to appraisal.

The same result obtains here. We therefore reverse the order compelling appraisal of Fairway Oaks’ supplemental claim and remand for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded. (BLACK and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.)

__________________

¹The pertinent policy language we are asked to construe is identical to the language that was at issue in Veranda.* * *