46 Fla. L. Weekly D1942a BOBBY F. YOUNG, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. 2nd District. Case No. 2D20-125. September 1, 2021. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Charlotte County; Donald H. Mason, Judge. Counsel: Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Richard P. Albertine, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, […]
Articles
Criminal law — Racketeering — Fraud — Evidence — Experts — Trial court properly excluded all testimony of defendant’s financial forensics expert because it failed to satisfy all three Daubert requirements — Defendant failed to show that any expert’s testimony was admissible even outside the Daubert context — Trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting expert’s proffer to one hour — Even if trial court erred in limiting proffer, defendant failed to show what testimony was left out — Trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding financial audit reports despite their alleged relevance to show oversight and lending agreements — Audit reports were not relevant to disprove fraudulent activity, and defendant drew no connection from evidence that he loaned money to the victims to any offense alleged by the state
46 Fla. L. Weekly D1929a MARCUS MAY, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. 1st District. Case No. 1D18-5153. August 26, 2021. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County. Thomas V. Dannheisser, Judge. Counsel: William R. Ponall of Ponall Law, Maitland, and Whitney S. Boan of Whitney S. Boan, P.A., Orlando, for Appellant. Ashley […]
Insurance — Homeowners — Water damage — Trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of insurer in action brought by homeowner after insurer denied claim for damage caused by water pouring from roof through ceilings and walls of home on ground that damage was not result of covered peril — There was genuine issue of material fact as to what damaged roof of home and whether opening in roof was created by a windstorm, which was a covered peril
46 Fla. L. Weekly D1877b CARLOS VEGA, Appellant, v. SAFEPOINT INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D19-2214. L.T. Case No. 16-9441. August 18, 2021. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Pedro P. Echarte, Jr., Judge. Counsel: Giasi Law, P.A., Melissa A. Giasi and Erin M. Berger (Tampa), for appellant. Cole Scott […]
Insurance — Homeowners — Misrepresentations on application — Trial court properly entered summary judgment for insurer in insureds’ action against insurer on basis that insureds failed to report two prior claims for water damage — Although insurer did not plead misrepresentation as affirmative defense, raising issue for first time in motion for summary judgment, issue was tried by consent — Omission on application was material where insurer would not have issued policy had it known of the prior claims — Insurer did not waive right to rescind policy by its post-loss actions
46 Fla. L. Weekly D1869b JERMAINE NEMBHARD and DONNETTE NEMBHARD, Appellants, v. UNIVERSAL PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D20-1383. L.T. Case No. 17-1852. August 18, 2021. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Martin Zilber, Judge. Counsel: Giasi Law, P.A., and Melissa A. Giasi and Erin M. Berger […]
Insurance — Homeowners — Coverage — Claims in excess of limits — Accord and satisfaction — Error to enter summary judgment in favor of insurer based on conclusion that check issued by insurer in amount of coverage limits constituted a valid accord and satisfaction where check did not include conspicuous statement that it was tendered in full satisfaction of claim — Although insurer sent additional correspondence with the check, language of correspondence stated only that insurer did not receive or approve a request to exceed limits as required by the policy, and did not include a statement that no further benefits would be payable or that amount of check was the maximum amount payable — No error in granting summary judgment in favor of insurer based on affirmative defense that insurer paid maximum amount due under the policy — Plaintiff failed to request that insurer allow it to exceed the policy limit before submitting invoice for completed work as policy required, and insurer paid policy limit to plaintiff
46 Fla. L. Weekly D1865a CERTIFIED PRIORITY RESTORATION a/a/o CHERYL COAKLEY, Appellant, v. UNIVERSAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, Appellee. 4th District. Case No. 4D21-374. August 18, 2021. Appeal from the County Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Edward A. Garrison, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 502019CC003953XXXXMB and 502020AP000026CAXXMB. Counsel: Gray R. Proctor […]