Adjuster Headlines
American Capital Assurance Corporation v. Courtney Meadows Apartments
American Capital Assurance Corp. v. Courtney Meadows Apts., No. 1D09-2940, ___ So. 3d ___ (Fla. 1st DCA, April 7, 2010)
A hailstorm damaged the roof of the insured apartment complex. On October 3, 2008, the insurer sent a final estimate, which indicated that only the office roof needed to be replaced and that the remaining roofs in the complex could be repaired. The final estimate also included other items of loss and estimated the total amount of damage at $168,285.98.
Quiroga v. Citizens Property Insurance Corporation
Quiroga v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., No. 3D08-2942, ___ So. 3d ___, (Fla. 3rd DCA, April 7, 2010)
A homeowner brought suit against his insurer to recover proceeds for hurricane damage to his home. The law firm representing homeowner under contingency-fee agreement secured proceeds for the homeowner, and, after the homeowner terminated the non-secured contingency-fee contract and refused to pay for the legal services, the law firm moved to impress a charging lien on the proceeds.
Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company v. Mathis
Florida Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. v. Mathis, 33 So. 3d 94 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company appealed a final judgment in favor of the Mathises, awarding them their homeowners policy limits. Hurricane Ivan caused substantial wind and flood damage to the Mathises’ home. The home was insured with a flood insurance policy with policy limits of $250,000, issued pursuant to the National Flood Insurance, and with a Florida Farm homeowners policy with policy limits of $295,600, which covered windstorm damage but excluded flood.
Warfel v. Universal Insurance Company of North America
Warfel v. Universal Ins. Co. of North America, No. 2D08-3134, ___ So. 3d ___ (Fla. 2nd DCA, May 12, 2010)
An opinion was originally issued in this case on December 9, 2009. The Second District Court of Appeal denied rehearing but certified a question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court:
DOES THE LANGUAGE OF SECTION 627.7073(1)(C) CREATE A PRESUMPTION AFFECTING THE BURDEN OF PROOF UNDER SECTION 90.304 OR DOES THE LANGUAGE CREATE A PRESUMPTION AFFECTING THE BURDEN OF PRODUCING EVIDENCE UNDER SECTION 90.303.
