Volume 1

Case Search

THE TOWN OF LONGBOAT KEY FLORIDA, a municipal corporation, Plaintiff, vs. UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD’S LONDON, CNA REINSURANCE OF LONDON, LTD, MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, and INTERNATIONAL SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois corporation, Defendants.

1 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 290a

Insurance — Insured city’s revocation of building permit was not an “occurrence” within definition and provisions of policy at issue — Claims reasonably expected as result of town’s actions not covered

Read More »

JOHN H. MILLAR, Plaintiff, v. UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS LONDON and those certain Other Underwriters Listed on C.A. HANSEN CORP. Cover Note Number 5H04/224, Defendants. ROBIN J. KERSHAW, Counterplaintiff, v. JOHN H. MILLAR, BRUCE JOHN JAMES-CATTELL, and OCEAN YACHT MANAGEMENT, LTD., jointly and severally, Counterdefendants.

1 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 271a

Insurance — Marine — Jury’s award of over $3 million for breach of insurance contract need not be reduced by $1 million for amount paid to plaintiff prior to litigation where verdict was supported by evidence, and jury was aware of the payment — Interest — Prejudgment — Plaintiff awarded prejudgment interest commencing on ninetieth day after date defendants were found to have waived filing of formal proof of loss where contract provided that proceeds of policy were due and payable within 90 days after proof of loss — Amounts of damage payments due from each separate underwriter calculated

Read More »

SUSAN YANES, Appellant, vs. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign insurer, Appellee.

1 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 335d

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Denial of coverage — Jury was properly instructed on issue of whether insured unreasonably withheld from insurer notice of existence of PIP claim — Argument — Remarks by defense counsel that insured never had to pay a penny out of her pocket and that he paid insurance premiums so people could recover whether or not they deserve it not preserved for appeal where plaintiff failed to move for mistrial after her objection to comments was sustained — Although improper, remarks did not constitute fundamental error

Read More »
Skip to content