2002

27 Fla. L. Weekly S987a

Insurance — Public officials and employees liability — Coverage — Where policy provided that insurer would defend any “suit” against insured, and defined the term “suit” as “a proceeding in a court of law where money damages may be awarded,” insurer had no duty to defend insured in proceeding before county career service council, alleging that insured discriminated against an employee in employment decisions on basis of political affiliation — County career service council is an administrative agency possessing only quasi-judicial powers, and is not a court of law

27 Fla. L. Weekly D148c

Insurance — Error to deny insurer’s motion to set off liability payments made to plaintiffs prior to trial

27 Fla. L. Weekly D377b

Insurance — Liability — Coverage — Occurrence — Where there were three separate acts of shooting, causing three separate injuries to three separate persons in three separate instances, trial court properly ruled that there were three separate occurrences for which insurer was liable — Issue certified to Florida Supreme Court as one of great public importance

27 Fla. L. Weekly D747b

Insurance — Liability — Addition of insurer as defendant in tort action against insured — Where plaintiff was awarded a tort judgment against insured, trial court erred in subsequently granting plaintiff’s motion to amend tort judgment to add insurance company as an additional defendant after plaintiff had obtained declaratory judgment against insurer on issue of coverage — Motion to add insurer as a defendant in tort action must be made prior to, or at time of entry of judgment against tort defendant — Plaintiff’s proper remedy is application for supplemental relief in declaratory judgment action

27 Fla. L. Weekly D596a

Insurance — Legal malpractice — Claims-made policy — Coverage — Failure of insured attorney to include all responsible defendants in client’s medical malpractice action resulted in single claim, and “per claim” policy limits, not aggregate limit, apply to client’s claim against attorney — Although attorney’s negligent omission of several defendants may be considered multiple wrongful acts, client suffered only one injury as result of attorney’s negligence, an award that did not represent the full extent of his damages

27 Fla. L. Weekly D1772a
823 So. 2d 210

Torts — Uninsured motorist — New trial — No error in denial of motion for new trial on ground of juror misconduct — Juror’s failure to disclose on voir dire six and seven year old workers’ compensation claims were properly found not to be material to jury service in personal injury action — Where juror disclosed on voir dire that he was an insured of insurance company which was a defendant in action, juror’s failure to disclose a contractual arrangement whereby he had agreed to repay insurance company for double reimbursement juror had received from insurance company and another insurance company was properly found not to constitute concealment because questioning on voir dire was ambiguous as to whether it sought such information — Evidence — Plaintiff’s single inadvertent mention of name of defendant’s liability insurer in violation of pre-trial ruling did not give rise to level of prejudice required for granting of mistrial — No error in failing to award interest on jury verdict from date verdict was rendered until date final judgment was entered

27 Fla. L. Weekly D958b
823 So. 2d 210

NOT FINAL VERSION OF OPINION
Subsequent Changes at 27 Fla. L. Weekly D1772a

Torts — Uninsured motorist — New trial — No error in denial of motion for new trial on ground of juror misconduct — Juror’s failure to disclose on voir dire six and seven year old workers’ compensation claims were properly found not to be material to jury service in personal injury action — Where juror disclosed on voir dire that he was an insured of insurance company which was a defendant in action, juror’s failure to disclose a contractual arrangement whereby he had agreed to repay insurance company for double reimbursement juror had received from insurance company and another insurance company was properly found not to constitute concealment because questioning on voir dire was ambiguous as to whether it sought such information — Evidence — Plaintiff’s single inadvertent mention of name of defendant’s liability insurer in violation of pre-trial ruling did not give rise to level of prejudice required for granting of mistrial — Trial court erred in failing to award plaintiff interest on jury verdict from date verdict was rendered until date final judgment was entered

27 Fla. L. Weekly D2583d

Insurance — Interest — Error to award prejudgment interest on insured property damage claim from date of jury verdict rather than from date of loss agreed upon by parties

27 Fla. L. Weekly D400b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — No error in entering summary judgment in favor of insurer in putative class action suit in which insureds sought late payment interest on medical expenses — Interest on overdue PIP payments does not commence until loss accrues, which is 30 days after insurer receives notice of loss — Trial court correctly determined that interest begins to accrue on the thirty-first day, when PIP payments are overdue

27 Fla. L. Weekly D1492a

Torts — Medical malpractice — Stay of proceedings — Insolvent insurer — Where action was brought against four defendants, one of defendants was insured by insolvent insurer, and order entered by foreign state court required that all actions in which insurer was or might be obligated to defend were stayed unless otherwise waived or agreed by all parties to the action, stay of proceeding under the circumstances was mandatory in order to allow Florida Insurance Guaranty Association time to investigate, evaluate, and defend the claims — Trial court erred in ruling that six-month stay was limited to proceedings against only the defendant whose insurer was insolvent, in granting plaintiffs’ motion to sever only that defendant from the lawsuit, and in allowing plaintiffs to proceed to take the severed defendant’s deposition, although all other discovery against him was stayed for the six-month time period — In order to protect FIGA’s interest, stay must be as to entire proceeding, not just as to one party