LEON BENJAMIN KING, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
NATIONAL SECURITY FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY AND GAB BUSINESS SERVICES, INC., APPELLEES/CROSS-APPELLANTS
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.
Leon Benjamin King, an insured, appealed a summary judgment in favor of insurance adjuster GAB Business Services, seeking to maintain a simple negligence claim against the adjuster. The court affirmed, holding that Florida law does not recognize a cause of action by an insured against an independent insurance adjuster for simple negligence, limiting recovery to intentional tort claims.
An independent insurance adjuster owes a duty only to the insurance company arising from their contractual relationship and does not owe a duty to the insured unless the insured sues for intentional tort. Accordingly, Florida law does not recognize a simple negligence cause of action by an insured against an independent insurance adjuster. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying costs for expert testimony and document production that were not relied upon in the summary judgment motion.
[1] An independent insurance adjuster owes a duty to the insurance company arising out of the contract between them, but does not owe a duty to the insured unless the insured…
[2] Florida law does not recognize a cause of action by an insured against an independent insurance adjuster in simple negligence.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“In Florida, an independent insurance adjuster owes a duty to the insurance company arising out of the contract between the insurance company and the independent adjuster, and does not owe a duty to the insured unless the insured is suing for an intentional tort”
Establishes the core holding that independent adjusters have no duty to insureds in simple negligence actions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKing was an insured who filed a negligence action against GAB Business Services, an independent insurance adjuster. GAB moved for summary judgment on …
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 Simple Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1339] PER CURIAM.
Leon Benjamin King appeals from an order granting summary judgment in favor of GAB Business Services, Inc. (hereinafter “GAB”). GAB cross appeals from the order taxing costs in this case.
The only issue on the main appeal is whether appellant, the insured, can maintain an action for simple negligence against appellee, the independent insurance adjuster. In Florida, an independent insurance adjuster owes a duty to the insurance company arising out of the contract between the insurance company and the independent adjuster, and does not owe a duty to the insured unless the insured is suing for an intentional tort under Howard v. Crawford & Co., 384 So. 2d 1326 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). In this case, appellant sued appellee in simple negligence, not on contract or intentional tort principles.
Conceding that there are no Florida eases on point, appellant cites Continental Ins. Co. v. Bayless and Roberts, Inc., 608 P. 2d 281 (Alaska 1980), in support of its position. The problem with relying on Continental is that Alaska’s insurance law is fundamentally different than Florida’s insurance law. In Continental, the Alaska Supreme Court held:
We ... join those jurisdictions holding ‘that an insurer, defending an action against the insured, is bound to exercise that degree of care which a man of ordinary prudence would exercise in the management of his own affairs, and if the insurer fails to meet that standard it is liable to the insured for the excess of the judgment over the policy limits, irrespective of fraud or bad faith.’
608 P. 2d at 293 (emphasis in original) (citations omitted). This holding is contrary to the well-established law in Florida that only allows an insured to sue an insurer for bad faith and not simple negligence. See Thomas v. Lumbermens Mut. Casualty Co., 424 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Boston Old Colony Ins. Co. v. Gutierrez, 386 So. 2d 783 (Fla.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 922, 101 S.Ct. 1372, 67 L.Ed.2d 350 (1981); § 624.155, Fla.Stat. (1991).
An insurance adjuster acts on behalf of the insurer. Old Republic Ins. Co. v. Von Onweller Const. Co., 239 So. 2d 503, 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970). The duties of an insurance adjuster vary and are defined by the terms of the contract between the insurer and the adjuster. Absent intentional torts, as in Howard v. Crawford & Co., breach of this duty subjects the adjuster to liability for the insurer’s resulting loss and the insurer can seek indemnity for liability accruing from the adjuster’s negligence. See GAB Business Sens., Inc. v. Syndicate, 809 F. 2d 755 (11th Cir.1987).
Since Florida law does not recognize a cause of action by an insured against an independent insurance adjuster in simple negligence, we affirm the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of appellee.
On the cross appeal, appellee/cross-appel-lant takes issue with the trial court’s denial of costs relating to its retention of Donald Korman, Esq., to render an expert opinion regarding the negligence of the insurance adjuster. We affirm, finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying these costs because testimony of Donald Kor-man was not relied on by appellee/cross-appellant in its motion for summary judgment and served no useful purpose in determining the issue before the trial court. See Coastal Petroleum Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp., 583 So. 2d 1022, 1025 n. 1 (Fla.1991); Caceres v. Physicians Protective Trust, 489 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). Appellee/cross-appel-lant also takes issue with the trial court’s denial of its costs related to the expense of document production which the trial court deemed irrelevant to the summary judgment. We likewise affirm the trial court’s denial of these costs finding no abuse of discretion.
AFFIRMED.
HERSEY, FARMER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
King v. Nat'l Sec. Fire & Cas. Co., 656 So. 2d 1335 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
-
The Home Ins. Co. v. Crawford & Co., 890 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…ed verdict on the claims for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. In Florida, an independent insurance adjuster owes a duty to the insurance company arising out of the contract between the company and the adjuster. King v. Nat’l Sec. Fire & Cas. Co., 656 So. 2d 1338, 1339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). “An insurance adjuster acts on behalf of the insurer. The duties of an insurance adjuster vary and are defined by the terms of the contract between the insurer and the adjuster.” Id. (citations omitted). “[B]reaeh of this…
-
Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp v. One Call Prop. Servs. (15th Cir. Ct. App. Div. 2015)…reasoning that Breese appeared to be more akin to a witness rather than a client and thus, the attorney-client privilege would not apply. Case law has defined the role and duties of an insurance adjuster. In King v. National Sec. Fire and Cas. Co., 656 So. 2d 1338 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that an independent insurance adjuster owes a duty to the insurance company arising out of a contract between the insurance company and the independent adjuster. King, 656 So. 2d at 1339.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Boston OLD Colony Ins. Co. v. Gutierrez, 386 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1980)
- Coastal Petroleum Co. v. Mobil OIL Corp., 583 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 1991)
- Athanasiou v. New Jersey, 450 U.S. 922 (U.S. 1981)
- Sandate v. United States, 450 U.S. 922 (U.S. 1981)
- GAB Bus. Servs., Inc. v. Syndicate 627, 809 F.2d 755 (11th Cir. 1987)
- Thomas v. Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 424 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- OLD Republic Ins. Co. v. VON Onweller Constr. Co., Inc., 239 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970)
- Jaime M. Caceres, M.D. v. Physicians Protective Tr. Fund, 489 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- King v. Nat'l Sec. Fire & Cas. Co., 656 So. 2d 1335 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Howard v. Crawford & Co., 384 So. 2d 1326 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)