45 Fla. L. Weekly D1519b Torts — Punitive damages — Error to award punitive damages where plaintiff failed to adequately allege and prove both a tort independent from acts that breached contract and non-duplicative damages grounded in tort ALF J. AANONSEN, Appellant, v. MICHAEL A. SUAREZ, etc., Appellee. 3rd District. Case Nos. 3D18-2466 & 3D19-0612. […]
Articles
Insurance — Uninsured/underinsured motorist — Damages — Set-off — Settlement agreements — Trial court erred by denying insurers’ motion to set off from jury verdict the amount of money which the insured received from settlement agreements with two other carriers — With regard to settlement with underinsured motorist’s liability carrier, trial court erred in finding that settlement was intended to solely satisfy insured’s wife’s consortium claim — Settlement release clearly and unambiguously stated that it was only for the insured’s benefit, did not mention insured’s wife, and release’s inclusion of parental and filial consortium claims was not related to any unpled spousal consortium claim as a matter of law — Even if insured and his wife had privately agreed to unilaterally apportion settlement among themselves, the trial court was bound to ignore such private unilateral apportionment when settlement release failed to expressly apportion the proceeds between them — Likewise, settlement agreement with insured’s third UM carrier unambiguously states that it was only for the insured’s benefit — Argument that no Florida statute expressly authorizes one UM carrier to obtain a set-off for duplicate benefits paid by another UM carrier lacks merit — Pursuant to section 627.727, benefits provided under a UM policy cannot duplicate benefits already paid to an insured under another UM policy — Because insured has not disputed that settlement with third UM carrier duplicated jury-determined UM benefits against other insurers, settlement amount must be set off from jury verdict
45 Fla. L. Weekly D1508b Insurance — Uninsured/underinsured motorist — Damages — Set-off — Settlement agreements — Trial court erred by denying insurers’ motion to set off from jury verdict the amount of money which the insured received from settlement agreements with two other carriers — With regard to settlement with underinsured motorist’s liability carrier, […]
Corporations — Breach of contract — Jurisdiction — Minimum contacts — Trial court incorrectly concluded that foreign corporation had sufficient minimum contacts with Florida to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction based on finding that foreign corporation sought out resident corporation’s brokerage services, conducted substantial communications with resident corporation for purposes of receiving brokerage services, and partially performed its obligations in Florida by making payments in Florida — Evidence did not establish that contract between the parties was a contract for services — Although foreign corporation routinely contacted resident corporation, routine contact, in and of itself, is not enough — Foreign corporation must have actively monitored resident corporation’s procurement of goods on foreign corporation’s behalf and/or otherwise engaged themselves in resident corporation’s procurement of the goods
45 Fla. L. Weekly D1481b Corporations — Breach of contract — Jurisdiction — Minimum contacts — Trial court incorrectly concluded that foreign corporation had sufficient minimum contacts with Florida to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction based on finding that foreign corporation sought out resident corporation’s brokerage services, conducted substantial communications with resident corporation for […]
Insurance — Automobile — Uninsured motorist — Resident relative — Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment determining that automobile insurer was required to provide UM coverage to insured’s resident relative where, although provision of insured’s policy excluded resident relatives who owned an automobile at time of accident from UM coverage such as the relative at issue, a separate provision in policy provided basic liability coverage to relative — If a motor vehicle liability insurance policy provides bodily injury liability coverage, then it must also provide UM coverage to those insured under the policy — While a policy may include specific provisions that exclude certain insureds from UM coverage if named insured knowingly accepts such a limitation and insurer offers a reduced premium, insurer in case at issue neither obtained informed acceptance nor provided reduced rates
45 Fla. L. Weekly D1475a Insurance — Automobile — Uninsured motorist — Resident relative — Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment determining that automobile insurer was required to provide UM coverage to insured’s resident relative where, although provision of insured’s policy excluded resident relatives who owned an automobile at time of accident […]
Torts — Discovery — Non-parties — Financial information regarding relationship between non-party insurer and physician-expert — Appeals — Certiorari — Denial
45 Fla. L. Weekly D1466b Torts — Discovery — Non-parties — Financial information regarding relationship between non-party insurer and physician-expert — Appeals — Certiorari — Denial MICHAEL TAHAN, Petitioner, v. EMMA MUNOZ, Respondent. 3rd District. Case No. 3D20-497. L.T. Case No. 19-4984. June 17, 2020. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court […]