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

August 7, 2015 by admin

Insurance — Discovery — Claim file — Error to require insurer to produce documents from claim file in declaratory relief and breach of contract case not involving bad faith

22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1117b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2210RODR

Insurance — Discovery — Claim file — Error to require insurer to produce various documents from claim file in declaratory relief and breach of contract case not involving bad faith claim
 
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA WELLNESS & REHABILITATION CENTER OF SOUTH MIAMI, LLC. a/a/o HILDA RODRIGUEZ, Respondent. Circuit Court, 11th Judicial Circuit (Appellate) in and for Miami-Dade County. Case No. 14-249 AP. L.T. Case No. 13-009497 CC 25. April 30, 2015. On Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Don S. Cohn, Judge. Counsel: Diane H. Tutt, Conroy, Simberg, Ganon, Krevans, Abel, Lurvey, Morrow & Schefer, P.A., for Petitioner. Arturo Dopazo, III, Law Offices of Arturo Dopazo, III, P.A., for Respondent.  (Before HERSCH, LUCK, AND MILIAN, JJ.)

(MILIAN, Judge.) State Farm seeks certiorari review of a non-final order requiring production of various documents from its claim file in a declaratory relief and breach of contract case with no bad faith claims. The issue on appeal is whether the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law by compelling production of certain insurer claim file materials, including file notes and various documents specific to the handling of the Assignee’s individual claim.

Where a petitioner seeks appellate relief from a trial court’s interlocutory discovery order, the petition must pass a three-prong test establishing: (1) a departure from the essential requirements of the law, (2) resulting in material injury for the remainder of trial, (3) that cannot be corrected on post judgment appeal.” Barker v. Barker, 909 So. 2d 333, 336 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) [30 Fla. L. Weekly D1655a]. For reasons discussed in more detail below, State Farm’s petition satisfies this test.

In cases that do not involve bad faith claims, the contents of an insurance claim file are generally not subject to discovery because they are either irrelevant, protected by the work product privilege, or both. Allstate Indemnity Co. v. Ruiz, 899 So. 2d 1121, 1123 (Fla. 2005) [30 Fla. L. Weekly S219c], Castle Key Ins. Co. v. Benitez, 124 So. 3d 379 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) [38 Fla. L. Weekly D2226a], State Farm Florida Ins. Co. v. Aloni, 101 So. 3d 412 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) [37 Fla. L. Weekly D1701b], Seminole Cas. Ins. Co. v. Mastrominas, 6 So. 3d 1256 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) [34 Fla. L. Weekly D559b], Gov’t Employees Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez, 960 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) [32 Fla. L. Weekly D1514a].

In Castle Key Ins. Co. v. Benitez, 124 So. 3d 379 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) [38 Fla. L. Weekly D2226a], the Court provided guidance on what types of cases lend toward protecting the claim file from discovery, and what types of claim file documents are entitled to protection. The Court determined that “[i]n considering objections to discovery requests for claims file materials, the ‘determinative issue’ is ‘what type of action’ the insured has brought.” Castle Key, 124 So. 2d at 380. Where a plaintiff seeks relief for breach of contract, a trial court departs from the essential requirements of the law in compelling disclosure of the contents of an insurer’s claim file when the issue of coverage is in dispute. Id. While neither party to the instant petition argues that coverage is disputed in the underlying case, there is no doubt that other substantive issues remain unresolved — namely, breach of contract and declaratory judgment issues.

As to claim file materials entitled to protection, the Court determined that file notes and various documents specific to the handling of an assignee’s claim are not discoverable in non-bad faith cases. Castle Key, 124 So. 3d at 381, n. 1., citing Nationwide Insurance Co. of Florida v. Demmo, 57 So. 3d 982 at 984 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) [36 Fla. L. Weekly D707a]. A review of the instant claim file confirms that it is comprised of the type of material deemed privileged in Castle Key.

For these reasons, the Petition for Writ of Certiorari is GRANTED. Accordingly, we QUASH the lower court order requiring production of Petitioner’s claim file materials. (HERSCH and LUCK, JJ., concur.)

* * *

Filed Under: Articles

Primary Sidebar

Blog Archives

  • 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