UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S, LONDON, ICAT SYNDICATE 4242
v.
JOHN SORGENFREI AND DEANA SORGENFREI
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
An insurance company appealed the trial court's denial of its motion to compel appraisal in a hurricane damage claim. The appellate court reversed, holding that because the insurer admitted coverage but disputed only the amount of loss and applicability of the deductible, appraisal was mandatory under Florida law.
The trial court erred in denying the motion to compel appraisal. Because the Insurer did not wholly deny coverage—it admitted coverage while disputing only the amount of loss and applicability of the deductible—appraisal was mandatory under Florida law.
[1] An insurer's motion to compel appraisal should be granted when the insurer admits coverage but disputes the amount of loss, as this presents an amount-of-loss issue to be…
[2] When an insurer does not wholly deny coverage, a disagreement between the parties as to causation or the extent of damages presents an amount-of-loss issue subject to app…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“when an insurer does not wholly deny coverage, a disagreement between the parties as to causation presents an amount–of–loss issue to be determined, under the contract, by appraisal”
Establishes the controlling legal standard from Florida Supreme Court precedent that appraisal is mandatory when coverage is not wholly denied
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Sorgenfreis insured their home with Underwriters at Lloyd's, London. Hurricane Irma damaged the home while the policy was in force. The Insurer ad…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Amount Of Loss Determination cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, (the Insurer) appeals the trial court’s nonfinal order denying its motion to compel appraisal. Because the Insurer did not wholly deny coverage for the loss, we reverse and remand for the trial court to enter an order compelling appraisal.
John Sorgenfrei and Deana Sorgenfrei (the Homeowners) insured their home with the Insurer. While the policy was in force, the home sustained damage as a result of Hurricane Irma, and the Homeowners claimed benefits under the policy. The Insurer admitted coverage under the policy but asserted that the loss did not exceed the named storm deductible and declined to make any payments on the claim.
The Homeowners subsequently sued the Insurer, alleging a breach of the insurance policy. In the answer, the Insurer again admitted coverage, but noted that the loss did not meet the required deductible. Additionally, the Insurer asserted the affirmative defense of pre-existing damage. The Insurer also filed a motion to compel appraisal, asserting its entitlement to an appraisal because the dispute involved the proper amount of loss under the policy. After a hearing, the court denied the motion to compel appraisal, and this appeal timely followed.
On appeal, the Insurer argues that the trial court erred in denying the motion to compel appraisal because it did not wholly deny coverage of the claim. Based on our de novo review, see People's Tr. Ins. Co. v. Garcia, 263 So. 3d 231, 233 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (citing Mora v. Abraham Chevrolet–Tampa, Inc., 913 So. 2d 32, 33–34 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)), we agree.
In Johnson v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., 828 So. 2d 1021, 1022 (Fla. 2002), the Florida Supreme Court held that when an insurer does not wholly deny coverage, a disagreement between the parties as to causation presents an amount–of– loss issue to be determined, under the contract, by appraisal.
Here, the Homeowners filed a single claim under the policy, and the Insurer agreed that a portion of the claim was covered—while also asserting that the amount of loss did 2 not exceed the deductible and that the balance of the claimed loss constituted pre-existing damage. As such, the Insurer did not wholly deny coverage. See First Protective Ins. Co. v. Colucciello, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D1810, D1810 (Fla. 5th DCA July 12, 2019); Garcia, 263 So. 3d at 236–38. Thus, the trial court erred in refusing to compel an appraisal. 1 Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand with directions to compel an appraisal.
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.
ORFINGER, EISNAUGLE, and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur. 1 We reject, without discussion, the Homeowners’ tipsy coachman argument that the Insurer waived its right to appraisal. 3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Underwriters AT Lloyd's v. Sorgenfrei, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D1810 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)
-
State Farm Ins. Co. v. Speed DRY, Inc., 292 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)
-
Am. Coastal Ins. Co. v. THE Villas of Suntree Homeowner's Ass'n, Inc. (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Johnson v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 828 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 2002)
- Mora v. Abraham Chevrolet-Tampa, Inc., 913 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- People's Tr. Ins. Co. v. Garcia, 263 So. 3d 231 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)
- Underwriters AT Lloyd's v. Sorgenfrei, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D1810 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)