PATRICIA AJMECHET, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, 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 insured is entitled to attorney's fees under section 627.428, Florida Statutes, when an insurance carrier pays an appraisal award after a lawsuit has been filed.
An insured sued her insurance company for a stolen car after the carrier did not pay her claim. The insurer demanded appraisal, paid the award after i…
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 Condition Precedent cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal from the denial of the appellant’s motion for attorney’s fees in an action against an insurance company. We reverse.
When the carrier did not pay Ms. Ajme-chet’s claim for her stolen, insured car, she sued the company in the circuit court, where the insurer demanded appraisal. See Preferred, Mutual Ins. Co. v. Martinez, 643 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). After the appraisers determined the amount of the loss, the carrier paid the award without further ado. Because the payment was obviously effected by the law suit,1 we hold the insured was entitled to fees under section 627.428, Florida Statutes (2001). See Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. DeSalvo, 748 So. 2d 941 (Fla.1999); Insurance Co. of North America v. Acousti Eng’g Co., 579 So. 2d 77 (Fla.1991), overruled on separate issue, Turnberry Assocs. v. Service Station Aid, Inc., 651 So. 2d 1173 (Fla.1995); Wollard v. Lloyd’s & Cos. of Lloyd’s, 439 So. 2d 217 (Fla.1983); Fortune Ins. Co. v. Brito, 522 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Avila v. Latin American Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 548 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The cause is remanded for determination of the amount of the fees.
Reversed and remanded.
. The appellee's argument that the appraisal process was a condition precedent to filing the action (which, it contends, was therefore unnecessarily, even improperly, filed) is entirely erroneous. See Paradise Plaza Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Reinsurance Corp., 685 So. 2d 937, 940 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)(observing that arbitration clause like this one was not condition precedent, but applied in pending litigation).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lewis v. Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 13 So. 3d 1079 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…2d DCA 2008); Jerkins v. USF & G Specialty Ins. Co., 982 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); First Floridian Auto & Home Ins. Co. v. Myrick, 969 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007), review denied, 980 So. 2d 489 (Fla.2008); Ajmechet v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 790 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Underlying these decisions is the notion that the insureds were entitled to fees as the insureds “did not ‘race to the courthouse,’ ” see Jerkins, 982 So. 2d at 18, the suit was not filed simply for the purpose of the attorney’s…
-
The Travelers Indem. Ins. Co. of Ill. v. Meadows MRI, LLP, 900 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…action. As such, it is entirely possible that Travelers’ conduct and participation in the appraisal was affected by Meadows’ representation of counsel and the threat of what ultimately became a pending lawsuit. See Ajmechet v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 790 So. 2d 575, 575 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (holding because payment of appraisal award was obviously effected by law suit, insured was entitled to fees under section 627.428(1)). The trial court’s award of attorney’s fees was consistent with this court’s stated purpo…
-
Goff v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co., 999 So. 2d 684 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…paid appraisal award after suit was filed because filing of suit resulted in payment of substantial additional funds); Travelers Indem. Ins. Co. of III. v. Meadows MRI, LLP, 900 So. 2d 676, 679 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Ajmechet v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 790 So. 2d 575, 576 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); compare with Federated Nat’l Ins. Co. v. Esposito, 937 So. 2d 199, 201-02 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (holding insureds not entitled to fees where insurer had already initiated appraisal process when insured filed suit); Lorenzo, 96…
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
- Wollard v. Lloyd's & Cos. OF Lloyd's, 439 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 1983)
- Turnberry Assocs. v. Serv. Station AID, Inc., 651 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1995)
- Preferred Mut. Ins. Co. v. Martinez, 643 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Ins. Co. OF N. Am. v. Acousti Eng'g Co. OF Fla., 579 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 1991)
- Ashley v. State, 522 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- N. Shore Hosp. & Totura & Co. v. Joseph, 685 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. DeSALVO, 748 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 1999)
- Lucio Avila v. Latin Am. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 548 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Paradise Plaza Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. The Reinsurance Corp. of N.Y., 685 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)