2008

33 Fla. L. Weekly D2204b

Insurance — Discovery — Claim file — Non-final order compelling production of documents and interrogatory responses over insurance carrier’s claims of work product privilege and irrelevance quashed, to extent it ordered production of documents in the claim file

33 Fla. L. Weekly D469a

Insurance — Discovery — Order allowing party to take deposition of insurer’s corporate representative and requiring insurer to produce documents regarding whether party is an owner or lien holder of insured aircraft is overly broad — To extent order requires production of insurer’s claims files while parties are engaged in coverage dispute, order causes irreparable injury by allowing discovery of material protected by work product privilege — On remand, trial court may enter order permitting deposition limited to deposition of underwriter with corporate knowledge of whether party is an owner or lien holder

33 Fla. L. Weekly D200a

Insurance — Disability — No error in entering summary judgment in favor of insurer on counts for breach of contract and declaratory judgment in which plaintiff contended that coverage under supplemental disability policy was to have increased from original coverage amount of $2,000 a month to over $6,000 a month when separate employer-provided disability policy terminated — Trial court did not err in concluding that no ambiguity was created by asterisked notations added to policy application by plaintiff — Record reflected not only that plaintiff was purchasing a $2,000 policy, but that plaintiff’s asterisks and notation made it clear that he was not discontinuing his separate policy; and nowhere in application did it say that new policy would increase when old policy ceased to provide coverage — Torts — Economic loss rule — No error in dismissing counts for fraud in inducement and negligent misrepresentation based on economic loss rule

33 Fla. L. Weekly D1154b

Contracts — Insurance — Disability — Error to enter final summary judgment in baseball team’s action for breach of contract and declaratory judgment seeking disability insurance coverage where there were genuine issues of material fact as to whether insurer assented or waived compliance with condition precedent in policy and whether insurer’s authorized representative’s knowledge about transfer in team’s ownership constituted knowledge by the insurer

33 Fla. L. Weekly D2870c
997 So. 2d 1194

Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Discovery — Work product — Insurer’s claims file constitutes work-product and is not subject to discovery until insurer’s obligation to provide coverage and benefits is determined — Order requiring insurer to produce its claims file to its insured constituted a departure from essential requirements of law — No error in permitting limited deposition of insurer’s claims adjuster

33 Fla. L. Weekly D1615a

Insurance — Group health — Foreign insurers — Class action for breach of contract and declaratory judgment alleging that insurer improperly raised premiums — Insureds may bring action against insurer under Chapter 627 if they can tie alleged violations to specific statutory language and establish entitlement to relief — Plaintiff did not adequately plead breach of contract claim where she identified several statutory sections that may have been violated by contract, but failed to indicate how she, herself, had suffered because of these violations — Although plaintiff claimed breach caused her to suffer monetary loss in excess of $1500, she failed to tie this loss to a statutory violation — With respect to declaratory relief claim alleging that insurer improperly discriminated by increasing premium rates based on claimants’ history/health status, in violation of Florida law, premium increase plaintiff cited to was for her entire classification group, not based on individual health-status-related factors — Additionally, attached as exhibit to complaint was letter from trustee of association through which plaintiff received insurance stating that the trustees approved rate adjustment, suggesting that trustees of association, rather than insurer, raised the premiums — Declaratory relief is available to determine whether general provisions of Part VII of Chapter 627 are applicable to an out-of-state policy, but only if claimant adequately alleges a potential claim based on the application of Part VII to the policy — No error in dismissing complaint

33 Fla. L. Weekly D1693a

Administrative law — Condominiums — Division of Florida Land Sales, Condominiums, and Mobile Homes erroneously determined, in declaratory statement, that items, such as Jacuzzis, trellises, and screen enclosures, which were purchased, installed, may be removed, and are usable only by individual unit owners are “condominium property,” which must be insured by condominium association, merely because they are located on the patio outside the individual unit rather than inside the unit

33 Fla. L. Weekly D1372b

Insurance — Commercial liability — Exclusions — Injury suffered by independent contractor during course and scope of her employment with insured — Coverage was excluded under independent contractor exclusion which excluded bodily injury “arising out of operations performed for you by independent contractors” — Coverage was excluded under cross liability exclusion which excluded bodily injury arising out of actions initiated or caused to be brought about by any insured covered by policy against any other insured covered by policy — Exclusions are not ambiguous

33 Fla. L. Weekly S392a

Insurance — Commercial general liability — Court is not in position to answer question certified from Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit as to whether post-1986 standard form CGL policy with products-completed operations hazard coverage, issued to a general contractor, covered the general contractor’s liability to a third party for the costs of repair or replacement of defective work by its subcontractor, because there was unresolved factual issue as to whether “defective work” in this case was limited to faulty installation of windows or whether windows themselves were also defective — Because that factual issue is determinative of outcome, case returned to Court of Appeals

33 Fla. L. Weekly D681aNOT FINAL VERSION OF OPINION
Subsequent Changes at 33 Fla. L. Weekly D774c

Civil procedure — Discovery — Class actions — Precertification discovery — Homeowners’ action against title insurance company alleging homeowners were not provided discounted title insurance rate, known as “reissue rate,” for which they may have been eligible when they refinanced their homes for period July 1, 1999, to present — Trial court abused its discretion in ordering, prior to class certification determination, full merits discovery of “all documents concerning, referring or relating to title insurance reissue rates” in the possession of defendant title insurance company and approximately 1,000 of its independent title insurance agents — In general, precertification discovery should be limited to matters relevant to class certification, not merits of case — Defendant introduced uncontradicted evidence demonstrating that the precertification discovery requested was unduly burdensome and would result in irreparable injury at this stage of litigation; and that trial court departed from essential requirements of law in ordering full merits discovery of closing files of defendant and its agents — Court’s decision does not deny plaintiffs discovery of defendant’s closing files as necessary to establish facts relating to class certification — On remand, trial court has discretion to limit discovery to decrease substantially the time, effort and expense involved in responding, including limiting discovery to a certain random sample of the files, and has discretion to require parties to jointly produce a detailed discovery plan which prioritizes class-related discovery, while not depriving parties from engaging in merits discovery when facts and issues are inextricably intertwined