48 Fla. L. Weekly D1415b UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. JORGE O. GONZALEZ-PEREZ, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D21-1899. L.T. Case No. 17-29252. July 19, 2023. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Barbara Areces, Judge. Counsel: Parafinczuk Wolf, P.A., and Jason B. Wolf, Austin Carr and Jean Fernandez (Fort […]
Articles
Torts — Automobile accident — Multi-vehicle accident — Proximate cause — Intervening cause — Foreseeability — Subsequent accident is type of harm that may be expected from a stationary vehicle blocking lanes on an expressway or interstate highway — Trial court erred in finding as matter of law that defendant who lost control of her Jeep, which then collided with median barrier and came to rest partially blocking two southbound lanes of expressway, was relieved of liability for injuries sustained by plaintiff when a semi-truck that came to a stop to avoid defendant’s stationary Jeep was rear-ended by another truck that failed to slow down, causing cargo on flatbed of rear-ended vehicle to dislodge and land on top of plaintiff’s vehicle — Because rear truck driver’s inattention to hazard ahead was foreseeable cause of collision with vehicle stopped on highway, law permits conclusion that conduct of Jeep driver set in motion a chain of events resulting in injury to plaintiff
48 Fla. L. Weekly D1195a LUIS ANGEL SERRANO, CENTRAL FLORIDA EQUIPMENT RENTALS, INC., and TARA LYNN CLARK, Appellants, v. ADDISON GRACE DICKINSON, STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, and BIOMET 31, LLC d/b/a ZIMMER BIOMET DENTAL, Appellees. 4th District. Case No. 4D22-742. June 14, 2023. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, […]
Insurance — Homeowners — Hurricane damage — Appraisal — Waiver — Active participation in litigation — Insurer waived right to appraisal where it filed answer in response to complaint, raised affirmative defenses that did not invoke right to appraisal, responded to discovery requests, and requested a jury trial — Record does not show that insurer deliberately evaluated nature of claims and then invoked appraisal at the first reasonable opportunity, as it was undisputed that dispute concerned amount of loss, not coverage — Trial court erred in granting insurer’s motion to invoke appraisal and abate litigation
48 Fla. L. Weekly D1190a JOSEPH SILVIA, Appellant, v. CASTLE KEY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 1st District. Case No. 1D21-3889. June 14, 2023. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Washington County. Timothy Register, Judge. Counsel: Stephanie A. Taylor and J. Phillip Warren of Taylor, Warren & Weidner, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellant. Jerry D. Sanders of […]
Civil procedure — Discovery — Attorney-client privilege — Waiver — Appeals — Certiorari — Trial court departed form essential requirements of the law by compelling production of all communications between plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ attorney based on determination that plaintiffs had waived attorney-client privilege by attaching a single, non-substantive attorney-client email to their affidavit in support of summary judgment — There was no evidence that disclosure was voluntary, and inadvertent disclosure of attorney-client communications does not automatically constitute a waiver of attorney-client privilege — Although plaintiffs had waived privilege by failing to follow procedures of rule 1.285(a) following the inadvertent disclosure, the waiver was limited to the email itself and did not extend to all communications between the plaintiffs and their attorney’s office — Selective disclosure doctrine was inapplicable where email did not pertain to any substantive issue in case and was not relied upon in any way
48 Fla. L. Weekly D1216a STEPHEN PETZOLD and BRIDGET PETZOLD, Petitioners, v. JOHN S. CASTRO and LAUREN E. CASTRO, Respondents. 2nd District. Case No. 2D22-4024. June 16, 2023. Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Emmett Lamar Battles, Judge. Counsel: Nicholas L. Sellars of Peterson & Myers, P.A., Lakeland, for […]
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Conditions precedent — Examination under oath — Failure to comply — Trial court erred by entering summary judgment in favor of provider based on determination that insurer was not prejudiced by the insured’s failure to appear for two examinations under oath because insurer failed to notify insured’s attorney about the EUO’s — It was error to find that insurer failed to notify insured’s attorney where, although insured claimed to have an attorney in a telephone conversation with insurer’s special investigator, there was no express notification from an attorney stating that he or she represented insured and requesting notice of any action from insurer — Furthermore, because submitting to an EUO was a condition precedent to receipt of PIP benefits under statute and policy, prejudice was not an element of insurer’s affirmative defense — Because plain language of statute and policy required insured to submit to an examination under oath, insured’s failure to submit to a properly noticed examination under oath barred receipt of benefits
48 Fla. L. Weekly D1130b INFINITY AUTO INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. MIAMI OPEN MRI, LLC a/a/o Rolando Amador, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D22-0948. L.T. Case No. 17-10295 SP. June 7, 2023. An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Lawrence D. King, Judge. Counsel: Gladys Perez Villanueva; Law Offices of Terry M. Torres […]