Publication

Robin Taylor Symons, Partner
Ph: (305) 668-4433
Email

Jose Leon, Senior Counsel
Ph: (305) 668-4433
Email

Jacqueline De Leon, Senior Counsel
Ph: (305) 668-4433
Email

Robin Taylor Symons

The Florida Supreme Court’s opinion issued at the end of May 2012, tackled several issues of concern to Florida insurers, including the viability of a claim for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and the effect of an insurer’s failure to comply with certain statutory requirements on wording and type-size in its policy. The decision also upheld the right to bond an adverse judgment pending decision on the coverage issue. The state’s highest court’s opinion is a rare win for the insurance industry and merits careful review by any insurer doing business in Florida. To read more about this, click here.

Jose Leon  
 
A recurring theme in insurance coverage disputes in Florida is the effect of a certificate of insurance that contradicts policy language.  Generally, Florida courts hold that a certificate of insurance cannot extend coverage beyond that provided by a policy, but there may be an exception to the general rule for certificates issued by agents of the insurer. A recent case from the Florida First District of Appeals, Interstate Fire & Casualty Co. v. Abernathy, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8278, reaffirmed the general rule on public policy grounds. Avoiding insurer insolvency was a cornerstone for the court’s decision. In Abernathy, the Court refused to base coverage on a certificate of insurance issued four days after a loss, finding that it would violate public policy to allow insurance coverage for a non-fortuitous event. To read more about this, click here.

Jacqueline De Leon

Though the Florida legislature had good intentions when it passed Florida Statute § 626.9744 governing claim settlement practices relating to property insurance, the language in the statute has been interpreted to require insurers to replace flooring throughout an entire house as long as the homeowner claims that the damaged section of the flooring cannot be matched and that the same type of flooring runs continuously throughout the house. This is true no matter the age of the flooring or the size of the continuous flooring. To read more about this, click here.

The Florida coverage team has a record of favorable results in state and federal courts across the state. The team brings the same care and preparation to mediation--particularly important in extra-contractual claims--as at trial. Gordon & Rees’ Florida coverage team leader, Robin Taylor Symons, has over 50 hours of mediation training (including through Florida's first appellate mediation training class). With her years of litigation experience and her experienced team, Robin brings insight and effective resolution strategies to solve problematic cases. 
 
When settlement is not possible, the Florida coverage team is trial-ready and has an excellent record in what can be a challenging state. The Florida team is diverse and bilingual, with credibility and familiarity with local conditions that adds to their technical knowledge and advocacy skills
 

Jose Leon has navigated successful conclusions for matters involving Spanish-speaking companies and insureds in first and third party coverage and bad faith disputes in Florida and Nevada (both states in which he is licensed). Jacqueline De Leon brings a science background to her work, in addition to her multi-lingual capabilities and advocacy skills. Resident in Orlando, Jackie adds geographic efficiency, allowing the Florida team to deliver excellent results in Central Florida and Tampa. Capri Trigo practiced in New York with a nationally recognized coverage firm before relocating to Florida, where she has strong ties in the business communities of the Florida Keys and Miami. 
 
Specific examples of the Florida team’s successes include the following:
 

• Prevailing on appeal and obtaining a $200,000 fees and cost judgment against a plaintiff who suffered the traumatic amputation of a leg above the knee in a second rear-end collision, which occurred shortly after a minor rear-end collision. The insurer promptly paid the applicable policy limits for the injuries sustained by the plaintiff in the second collision. Thereafter, the plaintiff unsuccessfully sought to stack coverage for both collisions by arguing that, although he had signed a non-stacking waiver, that waiver was invalid because it did not include the signature of his wife/insured. Once the stacking issue was resolved by the appellate court in favor of the insurer, the plaintiff argued that, although he was not injured in the first collision, he should be able to recover policy limits for both collisions because, but for the first collision, the second collision would not have occurred. Although traditionally plaintiff-friendly, the appellate court rejected this argument as well and the insurer was allowed to recover its fees and costs from the plaintiff under Florida’s offer of judgment statute.



• Securing the dismissal of an appeal of a summary judgment in an insurer’s favor based on a material misrepresentation in an application for insurance relating to a permissive driver. 



•  Winning a bench trial on the issue whether an insurer was obligated to reimburse its insured for a substantial settlement  
   notwithstanding a reservation of rights, tolling agreement and interim defense costs funding agreement.



• Also, successful outcomes involving issues of late notice, additional insureds, certificates of insurance, material misrepresentations on applications, non-compliance with Florida's Claims Administration Statute, and extra-contractual exposures due to alleged insurer misconduct. 



• Further, through a strategic approach to electronic and traditional discovery as an essential and early element of a case plan and resolution strategy, the Florida team has had particular success in defeating attempted bad faith set-ups by plaintiffs in South, Central, and North Florida.