RONALD REDDY AND YOLANDA REDDY, APPELLANTS,
v.
STATE FARM FLORIDA 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.
The court affirmed summary judgment for State Farm, holding that the insureds' failure to comply with pre-suit policy requirements, including submission of satisfactory proof of loss and examination under oath, barred their claim.
Failure to comply with a policy's condition precedent requiring sworn proof of loss before suit bars the insured from recovering policy proceeds.
[1] Submission of sworn proof of loss when required by an insurance policy is a condition precedent to coverage, and failure to comply before filing suit constitutes material…
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 intelligenceRonald and Yolanda Reddy filed suit against State Farm Florida Insurance Company seeking policy proceeds. The insureds had not complied with pre-suit …
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 To Coverage cases and more on FLexlaw
Affirmed. Gonzalez v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co., 65 So.3d 608, 609 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (holding “[t]he summary judgment entered below for the insurer on the ground that the insured had failed to comply with the pre-suit requirements of the policy that, among other things, she provide a satisfactory proof of loss and submit to an examination under oath, is affirmed.”); Edwards v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co., 64 So.3d 730 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (affirming summary judgment in favor of insurer based upon insured’s failure to comply with condition precedent by providing insurer with documents accurately reflecting the amount of loss claimed); Hunt v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co., 145 So.3d 210, 211-12 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (observing that “[i]t is well settled in Florida that submission of a sworn proof of loss when required by an insurance policy is a condition precedent to coverage. If the insured fails to comply with a condition precedent before filing suit, its breach is deemed material, and thus the insurer is relieved of its duties under the policy”)(internal citations omitted); Starling v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co., 956 So.2d 511, 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (holding that “[wjhere the insured has failed to provide sworn proof-of-loss in accordance with the policy contract, the insured is barred from filing suit against the insurer for the policy proceeds”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
DE Soleil S. Beach Residential Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. DE Soleil S. Beach Ass'n, Inc. (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)…So. 3d 334, 335 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), it is not the exclusive remedy. Additionally, the request for stay was not made until the summary judgment hearing itself and in the face of an imminent, adverse ruling. See Reddy v. State Farm Florida Ins. Co., 207 So. 3d 338 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Gonzalez v. State Farm Florida Ins. Co., 65 So. 3d 608 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). The granting or denial of a stay is generally vested in the broad discretion of the trial court, and we conclude that the Condominium Association has fai…
Authorities Cited
- Starling v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co., 956 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)
- Edwards v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co., 64 So. 3d 730 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)
- Gonzalez v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co., 65 So. 3d 608 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)
- Hunt v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co., 145 So. 3d 210 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
- Odom v. State, 65 So. 3d 608 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Taurice L. Brown v. State, 145 So. 3d 210 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)