LYNDA SCHNAGEL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE FARM MUTUAL 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.
Florida appellate court reversed summary judgment for insurer where insured partially complied with cooperation clause demands, holding that materiality of breach is a jury question when insured cooperates to some degree.
Where an insured cooperates to some degree with an insurer's demands under a cooperation clause, the question of whether there has been a material breach of the insurance contract is for a jury, not the trial court.
[1] When an insured provides partial compliance with an insurer's demands under a cooperation clause, the materiality of any breach is a question of fact for the jury rather…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSchnagel's 1996 Lexus was insured by State Farm. In April 2000, Schnagel reported the car stolen. State Farm demanded various documents including fina…
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 Cooperation Clause In Insurance Policy cases and more on FLexlaw
STEVENSON, J.
The instant appeal stems from the trial court’s entry of final summary judgment in favor of the defendant insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, and against its insured, Lynda Schnagel. We reverse.
Schnagel’s 1996 Lexus was insured by State Farm and, in April 2000, Schnagel reported the car stolen. State Farm believed that Schnagel was somehow involved in the theft and, pursuant to the policy’s cooperation clause, demanded that Schnagel provide it with a variety of documents, including financial records. Schnagel provided some, but not all of the requested documents. Since Schnagel acknowledged that she had not provided all of the requested documents, the trial judge concluded that she had breached the policy’s cooperation clause and, consequently, entered judgment in favor of State Farm. This was error. Where, as here, an insured cooperates to some degree, the issue of whether there has been a material breach of the insurance contract is one for a jury — not the trial judge. See Haiman v. Fed. Ins. Co., 798 So. 2d 811, 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Accordingly, we reverse the final judgment in favor of State Farm and remand for further proceedings.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
STONE and WARNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Himmel v. Avatar Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 257 So. 3d 488 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)…bstantially complie[s] with policy obligations is a question of fact” which precludes the entry of summary judgment. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. Figueroa, 218 So. 3d 886, 888 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); see also Schnagel v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 843 So. 2d 1037, 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Here, it is undisputed that Appellant submitted a timely sworn proof of loss via his public adjuster. Although on a different form, the submitted sworn proof of loss contained substantially the same information as reques…
-
Justin and Selma Soronson v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co., 96 So. 3d 949 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)
-
Solano v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co., 155 So. 3d 367 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…equired by [the insurer], was unreasonable”); Makryllos v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 103 So. 3d 1032, 1034 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Sunshine State Ins. Co. v. Corridori, 28 So. 3d 129, 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); Schnagel v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 843 So. 2d 1037, 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Here, there was not “a total failure to comply” by the Solanos. Dr. Solano appeared for his sworn statement, gave answers to some of the questions posed, and deferred to the adjuster for most of the information and to his…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Haiman v. Fed. Ins. Co., 798 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)