MARTHA ZAMORA AND ODILIO P. FUENTES, APPELLANTS,
v.
TOWER HILL PRIME INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2017-10-04
No. 3D16-1917
Before LOGUE, LUCK and LINDSEY, JJ.
226 So. 3d 1085 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2017) Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

Martha Zamora and Odilio P. Fuentes, the plaintiffs below, appeal an order granting'final summary judgment in favor of their insurer, Tower Hill Prime Insurance Company. Upon Tower Hill’s commendable confession of error, and because genuine issues of material fact exist as to the amount of the actual cash value of the insured loss at hand, we reverse the final summary judgment and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings. See § 627.7011(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2016); Siegel v. Tower Hill Signature Ins. Co., 3D16-1861, 225 So.3d 974, 977, 2017 WL 3722502, at *3 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 30, 2017); Francis v. Tower Hill Prime Ins. Co., 224 So.3d 259 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).

Reversed and remanded.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Roberts v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)
    …Roberts. This demonstrates a nonspeculative possibility—depending on the real facts—that Mr. Roberts was prejudiced by deciding not to testify, and the record attachments to the trial court's order do not show otherwise. See, e.g., Hill v. State, 226 So. 3d 1085, 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (reversing the summary denial of an ineffective assistance claim and finding prejudice to be sufficiently alleged where the defendant claimed counsel offered deficient advice about his decision to testify because he could h…
  • Williams v. State, 268 So. 3d 992 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)
    …y. Thus, accepting Williams’s factual allegations as true, the record provided does not conclusively refute that counsel’s failure to advise Williams of his absolute right to testify would not have resulted in a different outcome. See Hill v. State, 226 So. 3d 1085, 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (holding that appellant raised a facially sufficient claim that, absent his testimony, there was no chance for his defense to succeed, and there was a reasonable probability that but for counsel’s error, the results of the…
  • Velazco v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw