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

September 2, 2016 by admin

Insurance — Homeowners — Res judicata — Insured’s action against insurer to recover damages for plumbing leak is barred by res judicata where court had entered summary judgment for insurer in a prior suit for the same damages on the basis that insured lacked standing based on insured’s assignment of her insurance benefits to a remediation company

41
Fla. L. Weekly D2033b
Top of Form

Insurance
— Homeowners — Res judicata — Insured’s action against insurer to recover
damages for plumbing leak is barred by res judicata where court had entered
summary judgment for insurer in a prior suit for the same damages on the basis
that insured lacked standing based on insured’s assignment of her insurance
benefits to a remediation company

LEONA
CHARLES, Appellant, vs. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee. 3rd
District. Case No. 3D15-2251. L.T. Case No. 14-14893. Opinion filed August 31,
2016. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Monica Gordo,
Judge. Counsel: Cudlipp & Cudlipp, P.A., and Kevin E. Cudlipp and Michael
P. Cudlipp, for appellant. Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, and Maureen G. Pearcy,
for appellee.

(Before
WELLS, ROTHENBERG, and LAGOA, JJ.)

(ROTHENBERG,
J.) Leona Charles (“Charles”) appeals the trial court’s final order entering
summary judgment1 in favor of Citizens Property
Insurance Corporation (“Citizens”). Because we conclude that the instant
lawsuit is barred by the doctrine of res judicata, we affirm. See ICC
Chem. Corp. v. Freeman
, 640 So. 2d 92, 93 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (holding that
“[r]es judicata applies to all matters actually raised and determined as well
as to all other matters which could properly have been raised and determined in
the prior action, whether they were or not.”).

The
record reflects that Charles initially sued Citizens on March 25, 2013 based
upon Citizens’s failure to pay her supplemental request for damages, which were
incurred due to a plumbing leak in May 2012. In the 2013 lawsuit, Citizens
moved for summary judgment on its asserted affirmative defense of lack of
standing based on Charles’s assignment of her insurance benefits to a
remediation company, Fastech Restoration, Inc., on May 24, 2012.

At
the summary judgment hearing conducted on March 31, 2014, Charles claimed that
she and Fastech executed an amended assignment in early February 2013. The
trial court, however, declined to accept the document at the hearing because
Charles had neither replied to Citizens’s standing defense nor provided the
purported assignment to Citizens and the authenticity of the purported
assignment was in question. However, the trial court granted Charles leave to
amend her response to Citizens’s affirmative defenses to plead the amended
assignment and instructed Charles that she could seek leave to amend or that
she could appeal the trial court’s ruling. Rather than amending her pleadings,
Charles filed a second lawsuit for the same water loss on June 9, 2014, seeking
the same recovery and alleging the same breach by Citizens as pled in the 2013
law suit.

Both
suits seek to recover the same damages from the May 2012 water loss; allege
that Citizens breached the contract by failing to pay the entire loss claimed;
involve the same parties; and sued Citizens in its capacity as the insurer of
Charles’s homeowner’s policy. Thus, all of the elements of res judicata have
been met. See ICC Chem., 640 So. 2d at 93 (listing the four
elements as: (1) identity of thing sued for; (2) identity of the cause of
action; (3) identity of the persons and parties to the actions, and (4)
identity of the quality or capacity of the person for or against whom the claim
is made). Because the issue of Charles’s standing was raised by Citizens in the
prior lawsuit; not defended by Charles despite the trial court’s invitation to
her to amend her pleadings to assert the purported amended assignment; and
Charles’s standing was decided adversely to Charles in the prior lawsuit, the
trial court correctly concluded that the present lawsuit is barred by res
judicata.

Affirmed.

__________________

1The
order granting summary judgment was stamped as a final order by the trial court
and has already been determined by our Court to be a final appealable order.

* *
*

Filed Under: Articles

Primary Sidebar

Blog Archives

  • 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