2017

42 Fla. L. Weekly D101b
209 So. 3d 77

Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Where, in action against uninsured motorist insurer and uninsured motorist, defendants admitted liability and court bifurcated compensatory and punitive damages claims, it was an abuse of discretion to admit evidence and argument regarding the uninsured motorist’s intoxication at the time of the accident in the compensatory phase of trial — Evidence was insufficient to support award of damages for future medical expenses and future loss of earning capacity

42 Fla. L. Weekly D1048b
219 So. 3d 172

Workers’ compensation insurance — Rates — Increase — Public records — Public meetings — Trial court erred when it determined that rate increase approved by Insurance Commissioner was void because Office of Insurance Regulation and licensed insurance rating organization violated Sunshine Law under three separate statutory provisions and because rating organization violated state statutes when it denied individual’s request to access organization’s records — Remand for reinstatement of OIR’s final order approving 14.5% increase in workers’ compensation insurance rates — Sunshine Law violations — Section 627.091(6), which extended Sunshine Law to instances when a rate-determination committee of a rating organization meets to determine workers’ compensation insurance rates, did not apply to actuary employed by rating organization, acting in his individual capacity, to meetings between actuary and his own staff, to rating organization’s internal meetings, or to meetings between rating organization and OIR that occurred after rating organization made a rate determination and filed its proposal with OIR — Trial court erred in finding that section 286.011 applied to rating organization, a private organization that was not created by a public entity — Record did not support argument that rating organization was subject to Sunshine Law because OIR delegated its authority over rate filings to the organization — Trial court erred in concluding that organization was subject to Sunshine Law pursuant to section 627.093, which provides that section 286.011 is applicable to every rate filing, approval or disapproval of filing, rating deviation from filing, or appeal from any of these regarding workers’ compensation insurance — Access to records — Rating organization was not required to provide individual with access to its records under either section 627.291 or section 119.07

42 Fla. L. Weekly D2198a
232 So. 3d 1063

Insurance — Windstorm — Denial of coverage letter — Insured’s action against insurer — Trial court erred in entering summary judgment for insurer on basis that insured failed to comply with post-loss condition of submitting to examination under oath where there was factual issue as to whether insurer’s letter to insured was a denial of coverage letter — If letter was a denial of coverage letter, insurer waived any right it had to enforce post-loss conditions

42 Fla. L. Weekly D1780a
224 So. 3d 882

Torts — Automobile accident — Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Trial court departed from essential requirements of law by granting uninsured motorist insurer’s motion to sever claims against it from claims against alleged tortfeasor where claims were inextricably interwoven — Appeals — Certiorari is appropriate remedy where order severing UM claims from claims against tortfeasor may risk inconsistent outcomes and result in material injury that cannot be corrected on postjudgment appeal

42 Fla. L. Weekly D2182a
235 So. 3d 953

Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Conditions precedent to insured’s action against insurer to collect UM benefits — Waiver — Insurer waived defense that insured failed to comply with condition precedent of exhausting remedies against primary insurer before proceeding against it as excess insurer where defendant failed to plead the defense with sufficient particularity

42 Fla. L. Weekly D2652a
233 So. 3d 1258

Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Collector or antique vehicle policy that restricts coverage requires insurer to provide uninsured motorist coverage for accidents not involving the collector vehicle unless insurer has obtained insured’s written consent on an approved form selecting limitations on uninsured motorist coverage — Conflict certified

42 Fla. L. Weekly D476b
211 So. 3d 1119

Insurance — Business auto — Uninsured motorist — Trial court erred in finding that an employee of the company which was the named insured in a business auto policy was entitled to underinsured motorist benefits for injuries suffered when he was struck by an automobile being driven by an underinsured motorist while he was walking in front of his employer’s offices on his way into the building — No covered autos were involved in the accident, and employee was not a named insured under the policy — Because policy was an excess liability policy, there was no requirement that insured execute a written waiver or rejection of UM coverage — Because employee was neither a named insured nor a resident family member of an insured, he was, at best, a class II insured who could recover UM benefits only if he was occupying or driving a covered automobile

42 Fla. L. Weekly D238a
208 So. 3d 1239

Insurance — Contractual subrogation — Assignment of convenience by insurance company of subrogation rights

42 Fla. L. Weekly D655a
213 So. 3d 1104

Public records — Exemptions — Trade secrets — Trial court properly determined that QUASR report submitted to Office of Insurance Regulation by insurance company contained data that was exempt from disclosure under public records law as trade secret — Evidence supported finding that data possessed independent economic value to others

42 Fla. L. Weekly D1585a
231 So. 3d 528

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Civil procedure — Relief from judgment — Trial court erred in vacating stipulated judgment entered in settlement of action to recover PIP benefits on basis that there was no meeting of the minds as to whether the stipulated judgment would bar subsequent litigation involving insurer’s obligation to cover medical expenses incurred by insured subsequent to the stipulated judgment — Even if settlement agreement was void, judgment entered pursuant to the agreement was merely voidable, not void — As there was no record evidence to support trial court’s finding that there was no meeting of the minds, trial court’s vacation of stipulated judgment on that basis was an abuse of discretion