2005

30 Fla. L. Weekly D31a

Insurance — “Betterment” deductions — Unambiguous terms of policy permitted insurer to deduct from its payment to insured the depreciation of the repaired or replaced parts

30 Fla. L. Weekly D2447a

Insurance — Automobile — Cancellation of policy — Where insurer notified insured that a higher premium was due, properly notifying insured of insured’s options, and insured failed to respond, insurer’s cancellation of policy after insured’s failure to respond was effective although insurer returned the unearned premium on the policy to a premium finance company rather than to the insured

30 Fla. L. Weekly D1239b

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — No-fault — Litigating applicability of multiplier involves litigating amount of fee rather than issue of entitlement to fees — Accordingly, in action for no-fault benefits when insured has recovered damages and insurer concedes entitlement to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, insured may not be awarded attorney’s fees for successfully litigating whether a multiplier is applicable

30 Fla. L. Weekly D1885a

Insurance — Commercial general liability — Action by insured contractor and its surety against primary and excess insurers for judgment declaring that provisions of commercial general liability policies required defendants to defend and indemnify contractor and surety for damages to golf course constructed by contractor — Although coverage allowed under “product-completed operations hazard” exception to “your work” exclusion in policies does not apply to “work that has not yet been completed or abandoned,” trial court erred in entering summary judgment for defendants where there was genuine issue of material fact as to whether damage to golf course occurred before or after insured contractor completed its work on the project — Attorney’s fees — Surety is entitled to award of appellate attorney’s fees under section 627.248, Florida Statutes (2000), conditioned upon ultimate entry of judgment in favor of contractor and surety on remand — Where surety properly makes payment to correct defective construction or to complete construction project undertaken by its principal, surety becomes subrogated to rights and remedies of its principal, and is entitled to award of fees under statute — Conflict certified

30 Fla. L. Weekly D235b

Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Proposal for settlement — Error to strike insurer’s proposal for settlement in action under valuable items policy

30 Fla. L. Weekly D5b
890 So. 2d 1163

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Prevailing party — Under circumstances insured was entitled to attorney’s fees under section 627.428 after insurer voluntarily dismissed its declaratory judgment action seeking determination as to whether there was a duty to defend or coverage — Insurer’s voluntary dismissal of declaratory action was functional equivalent of a confession of judgment or verdict in favor of insured where insurer actually provided insured a defense and coverage in separate tort litigation by defending insured with reservation of right to deny coverage, filing separate declaratory relief action, and while declaratory action was pending, resolving tort claim, following small judgment in favor of claimant which was less than offer of judgment, by stipulation for dismissal with prejudice

30 Fla. L. Weekly D1585d

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Insured prevailing in action against insurer — Attorney’s fees award reversed because underlying judgment was reversed on appeal

30 Fla. L. Weekly D2359a

Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Insured’s action against insurer — No abuse of discretion in dismissing with prejudice declaratory judgment action in which insured had sought declaration of rights under policy and in which insured argued that insurer’s settlement of third-party claim against insured, which insurer had defended under a full reservation of rights, resulted in a confession of judgment in the independent declaratory judgment action, thereby entitling insured to award of attorney’s fees — In settling with third party, insurer did not “decline to defend its position” in the pending declaratory action initiated by insured — Insured was not forced to sue insurer to be provided a defense — Instead, it appropriately provided defense under reservation of rights — When insurer settled claim on behalf of insured within its policy limits, thereby protecting insured from financial exposure, coverage issue became moot, as trial court found

30 Fla. L. Weekly D1228a

Insurance — Professional liability — Attorney’s fees — Where insured was defendant in tort action, insured tendered lawsuit to insurer, insurer filed declaratory judgment action, insurer voluntarily dismissed declaratory judgment action without prejudice, and insurer settled underlying lawsuit, trial court erred in denying insured’s motion for attorney’s fees — Actual rendition of order or decree is not an absolute prerequisite to an insured’s entitlement to attorney’s fees under section 627.428(1) — For purposes of statute, whether voluntary dismissal is “functional equivalent of a confession of judgment or verdict in favor of the insured” does not turn on order of voluntary dismissal of a declaratory action against an insured and the settlement of a claim against the insured; rather, fact that dismissal and settlement are related to each other is enough to trigger operation of statute

30 Fla. L. Weekly D466a

Attorney’s fees — Offer of settlement — Under unique circumstances of case, offer of settlement made by insurer to two insureds in action filed by insureds following insurer’s denial of their claim against their homeowner’s policy was not invalid for failing to apportion amounts attributable to each insured — Plaintiffs’ claims were unified, not separate and distinct, plaintiffs were represented by the same lawyer, and there was no conflict of interest between the plaintiffs — Good faith — No abuse of discretion in finding that offer off $30,000 in settlement of claim for loss in excess of $300,000 was made in good faith after extensive discovery and after insurer received documentation which it claimed would support its belief that insureds misrepresented material facts regarding their insurance claim by altering receipts for items claimed as a loss, a fact which was borne out during trial and resulted in defense verdict