THE ARIES INSURANCE CO., APPELLANT,
v.
HERCAS CORP. D/B/A GISELLE BOUTIQUE, APPELLEE; HERCAS CORP. D/B/A GISELLE BOUTIQUE, APPELLANT, V. THE ARIES INSURANCE CO., APPELLEE
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 and insured disagreed over appraisal damages following property losses. The appellate court reversed the trial court's award of prejudgment interest from the date of loss, holding that interest accrues from the appraisal award date when damages are liquidated, and affirmed the denial of appraiser fee reimbursement.
An insured is entitled to prejudgment interest from the date of the appraisal award, not from the date of loss, because the appraisal award liquidates the damages. An insurance company is not required to reimburse an insured's appraiser fees where the policy explicitly provides that each party shall pay its own appraiser's fees.
[1] Prejudgment interest is awarded from the date of an appraisal award, as that is when damages become liquidated.
[2] An insurance policy provision requiring each party to pay its own appraiser fees will be enforced.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“appraisal award gives rise to liquidated damages entitling insured to prejudgment interest”
Establishes the principle that prejudgment interest accrues from the appraisal award date, when damages become liquidated
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFollowing covered losses from property theft and vandalism, Aries Insurance Company and Hercas Corporation invoked the policy appraisal procedure to d…
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 Appraisal Award cases and more on FLexlaw
SHEVIN, Judge.
In these consolidated appeals, The Aries Insurance Company seeks reversal of a final judgment pursuant to an appraisal award, and Hereas Corporation appeals the trial court’s denial of its motion for certain appraisal costs. We reverse the final judgment and affirm the order denying Hereas’ motion.
Following covered losses resulting from property theft and vandalism, the parties resorted to the policy appraisal procedure to determine the amount of the losses.1 The parties did not litigate the issue of coverage. The court entered a final judgment as to the appraisal amount and awarded Hereas prejudgment interest from the date of the last theft. Subsequently, the court denied Hereas’ motion for appraiser fees.
First, we reverse the prejudgment interest award. The trial court erred in awarding Hereas prejudgment interest from the date of the last loss. Hereas was entitled to interest from the date of the appraisal award as that is the date on which the damages were liquidated. See De Salvo v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 705 So. 2d 694, 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)(appraisal award gives rise to liquidated damages entitling insured to prejudgment interest), approved, 748 So. 2d 941 (Fla.1999). Accordingly, the award of prejudgment interest from the date of loss is error. Second, we affirm the order denying Hereas’ costs motion. The policy provides that each party shall pay the fees for its chosen appraiser. No basis exists to disregard that provision. Hereas’ reliance on State Farm, Fire & Cas. Co. v. Albert, 618 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 629 So. 2d 135 (Fla.1993), is misplaced as that case does not indicate whether it involves the same policy language. Similarly, American Indem. Co. v. Comeau, 419 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), is inapplicable as that' case involves statutory uninsured motorist coverage. Therefore, the trial court properly denied Hereas’ motion.
Finally, we do not consider Hereas’ suggestion that the awards of prejudgment interest from the date of the loss and of appraisal costs are justified based on Aries’ alleged delay tactics in processing the claims as that ground was not raised in the trial court. See Lipsig v. Ramlawi, 760 So. 2d 170, 192-93 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)(court declines to address issue not preserved for appellate review).
Accordingly, we reverse the prejudgment interest award, affirm the order denying appraisal costs, and remand for further consistent proceedings.-
. The appraisal process began two years after Hereas filed a breach of contract action against Aries.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lexington Ins. Co. v. Ramdas and Chitra Bhandari, 807 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…; Allstate Ins. Co. v. Martinez, 790 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), review granted, No. SC01-1622, 805 So. 2d 804 (Fla. Jan. 15, 2002); Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Alvarez, 785 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)(holding that Aries Ins. Co. v. Hercas Corp., 781 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), does not conflict with Independent Fire Ins. Co. v. Lugassy, 593 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)), review denied, 800 So. 2d 612 (Fla.2001). On remand, the trial court shall award interest from the date of the appraisal award. Af…
-
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Martinez, 790 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…ides that each party is to pay the appraiser it chooses and equally bear all other expenses, including that of the umpire. We therefore reverse the award of costs to Martinez and remand for recalculation of costs. See Aries Ins. Co. v. Hercas Corp., 781 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). [*1153] Affirmed in part; reversed in part, and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith. . As late as September 22, 1999, the trial court continued to deny Martinez’ requests to compel appraisal as Martinez had not yet comp…
-
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Roberto and Maria Blanco, 791 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…ht. Thus, the Blancos were not entitled to prejudgment interest prior to receiving an appraisal award which determined their actual loss. See also Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Alvarez, 785 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Aries Ins. Co. v. Hercas Carp., 781 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)(stating that the insured was entitled to prejudgment interest from the date of the appraisal award as that was the date on which the damages were liquidated). Thus, prejudgment interest is awarded from the date of the appraisal a…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lipsig v. Zahid A. Ramlawi, 760 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Am. Indem. Co. v. Comeau, 419 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. DeSALVO, 748 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 1999)
- State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Albert, 618 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- DeSALVO v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 705 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)