2000

25 Fla. L. Weekly D1175aNOT FINAL VERSION OF OPINION
Subsequent Changes at 25 Fla. L. Weekly D2459b

Insurance — Homeowners — Where insured home was damaged by hurricane, trial court properly ruled that policy was void and that insurer was entitled to rescission on ground that insureds misrepresented or inflated amount of loss in their contents proof of loss — Where there has been fraud or misrepresentation, insurance policy is properly treated as indivisible, so that fraudulent contents claim voids policy in its entirety, and there is no coverage for damage to dwelling — Evidence — Trial court properly excluded expert’s testimony that no fraud had been committed where such testimony had effect of advising jury how to decide case — No abuse of discretion in exclusion of expert’s testimony regarding insurance industry general standards for adjusting claims or guidelines used to determine whether a fraud has been committed

25 Fla. L. Weekly D885d

Workers’ compensation — Insurance — Error to find that insurance coverage exists under doctrine of promissory estoppel, where carrier failed to respond to employer’s request to add Florida to list of covered states, but carrier never made any representation to employer that it would provide coverage for accidents occurring in Florida

25 Fla. L. Weekly D1551a

Torts — Contracts — Insurance — Action by plaintiff who leased property for use as parking lot and contracted with another party to operate the parking lot, against insurance agency which agreed to add lessee as additional insured to operator’s liability insurance policy but failed to do so, with result that plaintiff has been required to expend attorney’s fees and costs in defending a suit arising out of a robbery which occurred at parking lot — Damages — Additur — Error to deny plaintiff’s motion for additur where jury found defendant liable but awarded only 16% of damages shown by exhibits — Error to deny additur where amount awarded could only have been arrived at by speculation and conjecture because it bears no reasonable relation to damages proved — Intervention — Where court granted motion to intervene by lessor of parking lot property, court erred in failing to give intervenor notice of trial and failing to include reference to intervenor on verdict form — It was inconsistent and confusing to admit into evidence proof of intervenor’s damages and then remove intervenor from jury’s consideration simply because intervenor was not a plaintiff — Attorney’s fees — Requests for admissions — Abuse of discretion to summarily deny plaintiff’s motion for fees and expenses incurred in proving matters which defendant should have admitted — Expenses incurred by successful litigant as result of opposing party’s failure to admit requests for admissions may not be assessed against opposing party for denying request to admit hotly-contested, central issue in case — No error in failure to reduce judgment on basis of plaintiff’s comparative negligence where action was a promissory estoppel action to create insurance coverage rather than a negligence action

25 Fla. L. Weekly D94b

Insurance — Errors and omissions — Claims made policy — Letter in which counsel for client who had obtained a personal injury judgment stated claim against insurance agents/insureds for negligent failure to provide primary liability insurance for client’s loss and requested that letter be turned over to agents’ errors and omissions insurance carrier for handling amounted to a demand for money within meaning of insurance policy — Subsequent claim that agents negligently failed to procure excess coverage, which claim was first raised four days after insurance policy had expired, was related to initial claim which was filed prior to expiration of policy — No error in declaratory judgment determining that coverage existed

25 Fla. L. Weekly D361b

Insurance — Errors and omissions — No coverage under claims-made policy for undisclosed preexisting claims — Letter from plaintiff’s counsel amounted to a claim — No entitlement to coverage where insured had notice of facts which could be basis for claim and failed to disclose them as required by application for policy

25 Fla. L. Weekly D1135b

Insurance — Liability — Duty to defend — Where insurer obtained full satisfaction of the only covered claim against its insured, it had right to withdraw its defense and had no obligation to prosecute appeal on behalf of its insured

25 Fla. L. Weekly D1022b

Contracts — Insurance — Automobile liability — Duty to defend — Insurer which complied with its obligation under policy to retain attorney to defend suit against insured had no obligation or right to supervise or control the professional conduct of the attorney it retained and is not liable for the litigation decisions of counsel — No abuse of discretion in entering judgment in favor of insurer in breach of contract action that sought to impose liability on insurer for alleged acts of negligence by attorney retained to represent insured

25 Fla. L. Weekly D73a

Appeals — Non-final orders — Insurance — Order determining only that insurer has duty to defend, but not determining coverage, is not appealable

25 Fla. L. Weekly D136a
746 So. 2d 1255

Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Discovery — Improper to require uninsured motorist insurer to produce list of documents showing identity of cases in last three years in which medical experts were retained to perform independent medical examinations, compulsory physical examinations, PIP examinations, or medical reviews, and list of documents showing amount of money paid to medical experts for their services

25 Fla. L. Weekly D2705a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Lease between provider which submitted an MRI bill and company which conducted the MRI — No error in requiring corporate officer of provider/claimant to submit to deposition duces tecum to enable insurer to verify what, if any, amount was due — Provider’s outright refusal to supply anything upon PIP insurer’s informal discovery request established good cause for court to order discovery under section 627.736(6)(c) — Scope of discovery under section 627.736(6)(c) is not limited to production of documents specifically identified in section 627.736(6)(b) — Lease is well within meaning of statutory provision permitting PIP insurer to discover facts about “costs of such treatment” — Statute authorizes discovery of “facts,” and is not limited merely to production of documents — Fact that insurer promptly paid claim and then sought discovery does not deprive it of right to ascertain whether claim was improper in some respect — Fact that statute was recently amended to extend time of payment obligation until after a claimant furnishes discovery does not alone generate an abandonment of carrier’s right to recover an overpayment — No collateral estoppel effect arose from insurer’s having been denied court-ordered discovery in other cases involving other insureds