PREFERRED NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
MIAMI SPRINGS GOLF VILLAS, INC., 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.
Preferred National Insurance Company appeals a trial court judgment confirming an appraisal award of $340,320 in business income loss from windstorm damage. The court affirms, rejecting Preferred's claims that the umpire's impartiality was compromised by ex parte communications and that an unlisted endorsement should have controlled the loss calculation.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment confirming the appraisal award, finding no impropriety in the umpire's communications with the parties and holding that an endorsement not listed or attached to the policy cannot form part of the policy.
[1] An umpire's request for the parties' respective positions is not an impropriety in appraisal proceedings, which are less formal than arbitration.
[2] An endorsement not listed or attached to an insurance policy cannot form part of the policy.
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“Unlike arbitration procedures, appraisals are less formal proceedings, where the umpire independently attempts to resolve any differences in the appraisals offered by both sides.”
Establishes the legal standard for evaluating umpire conduct in appraisal proceedings and distinguishes them from arbitration.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMiami Springs sustained windstorm damage on February 2, 1998, and filed a claim under its comprehensive general commercial liability policy with Prefe…
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 Confirmation Of Appraisal Award cases and more on FLexlaw
FLETCHER, Judge.
Preferred National Insurance Company [Preferred] appeals a final judgment confirming an appraisal award in favor of Miami Springs Golf Villas, Inc. [Miami Springs]. We affirm.
This case arose out of a claim for windstorm damage sustained on February 2, 1998. At the time, Miami Springs was insured by Preferred under a comprehensive general commercial liability policy, which included coverage for business income loss on its declaration page, but did not list or attach an endorsement which, according to Preferred, provided the sole method for calculating such loss.
Preferred’s refusal to pay a portion of the claimed business loss led to the filing of this action in which Preferred stipulated to the existence of coverage but moved to compel an appraisal on the amount of the loss. The trial court subsequently appointed Robert Steinberg to serve as umpire after the parties’ respective appraisers were unable to reach agreement on the amount of the business loss. On June 20, 2000, the umpire filed his report awarding Miami Springs $340,320.00 in lost business income which was later confirmed by the trial court in the final judgment here appealed.
Preferred raises two issues on appeal. First, Preferred argues that the umpire’s neutrality was tainted by ex parte communications with counsel for Miami Springs and that the trial court erred in denying its motion to either interview or replace the umpire. Unlike arbitration procedures, appraisals are less formal proceedings, where the umpire independently attempts to resolve any differences in the appraisals offered by both sides. See, e.g., Allstate Ins. Co. v. Suarez, 786 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co. v. Hernandez, 735 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Preferred Ins. Co. v. Richard Parks Trucking Co., 158 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963). We therefore see no impropriety in the umpire requesting the parties’ respective positions to aid him in resolving these differences.
Under the circumstances herein, we also can find no error in the award for business income loss. Implicit in the court’s confirmation of the umpire’s award was its determination that an endorsement which was neither listed nor attached to the insurance policy could not form part of the policy.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment below, grant Miami Springs’ motion for attorney’s fees in the appellate proceedings, and remand with instructions to the trial court to determine the proper amount.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jyurovat v. Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 84 So. 3d 1238 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…Seville Place Condo. Ass’n, 74 So. 3d 105, 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (insurer filed “emergency motion and affidavit seeking removal of the neutral umpire previously appointed by the court”); Preferred Nat’l Ins. Co. v. Miami Springs Golf Villas, Inc., 789 So. 2d 1156, 1157 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (insurer moved the trial court to interview or replace allegedly partisan umpire); Weinger v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 620 So. 2d 1298, 1299 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (insureds moved to recuse umpire selected by parties’ apprai…
-
Three Palms Pointe, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 250 F. Supp. 2d 1357 (M.D. Fla. 2003)
-
St. Lucia Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co. (M.D. Fla. 2020)
Authorities Cited
- Preferred Ins. Co. v. Richard Parks Trucking Co., Inc., 158 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Hernandez, 735 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)