CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION,
v.
DASARO ENTERPRISE, INC., ETC.

Fla. 3d DCA | 2022-06-22
No. 21-2165
Scales, J., Lindsey, J., Miller, J., Gonzalez-Meyer, J.
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2022)

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.


Holding

An invoice for services already rendered does not equate to a request for authorization to exceed the $3,000 emergency measures limit, and therefore an insurer is not required to respond within forty-eight hours to such an invoice.


Headnotes

[1] An invoice for emergency services already rendered does not constitute a request for authorization to exceed a policy limit on emergency measures, and therefore an insure…

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 intelligence

Key Quotes

“Seeking payment of an invoice for services already rendered does not equate to requesting authorization to exceed the $3,000 limit. Therefore, although Citizen[s] is required to respond within forty-eight hours to a request to exceed the $3,000 limit for reasonable emergency measures, it is not required to respond to a demand for payment of an invoice for reasonable emergency measures already rendered to an insured.”

Court's application of controlling precedent from All Insurance Restoration Services, Inc. v. Citizens Property Insurance Corp.

Facts & Procedural History

Dasaro Enterprise, Inc., as assignee of Citizens's insured, submitted a $5,822.15 invoice for emergency water mitigation services already completed at…

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.


Opinion of the Court

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed June 22, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-2165 Lower Tribunal No. 19-6769CC ________________

Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, Appellant,

vs.

Dasaro Enterprise, Inc., etc., Appellee.

An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Gloria Gonzalez-Meyer, Judge.

Lydecker LLP, and Michelle Diverio and Janice Lopez, for appellant.

No appearance, for appellee.

Before SCALES, LINDSEY and MILLER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

1 This policy provision provides that if Citizens fails to respond within fortyeight hours of its receipt of the insured’s request, “[the insured] may exceed the [$3,000] amount . . . only up to the cost incurred by [the insured] for the reasonable emergency measures necessary to protect the covered property from further damage.”

2 One of the orders appealed by Citizens is an October4, 2021 order that, while not entirely clear, purports to dismiss the case as a mechanism for establishing that Dasaro was the prevailing party in the lower proceeding. We quash, rather than reverse, this October4, 2021 order.

Footnotes
2 Appellant Citizens Property Insurance Company, the defendant below, appeals a series of orders that effectively entered final summary judgment against Citizens in the amount of $2,822.15. The judgment stems from a $5,822.15 invoice that appellee Dasaro Enterprise, Inc. (“Dasaro”), as the assignee of Citizens’s insured, sent to Citizens for emergency water mitigation services Dasaro provided at the home of Citizens’s insured. The underlying homeowner’s insurance policy’s “Reasonable Emergency Measures” provision, though, limits to $3000 Citizens’s payment obligation for necessary measures taken solely to protect the property from further damage, unless Citizens approves a “request . . . to exceed the [$3,000] limit” within forty-eight hours of receiving a request.1 Having received no such “request” – other than Dasaro’s invoice for work already completed – Citizens paid Dasaro only the $3,000 policy limit. In May 2019, Dasaro brought this action in the county court for Miami- Dade County, seeking the $2,822.15 difference between its invoice and the policy limit paid to it by Citizens. The trial court entered the challenged orders, accepting Dasaro’s arguments below that (i) its invoice for completed
3 repairs was tantamount to the “request” contemplated in the “Reasonable Emergency Repairs” provision; and (ii) because Citizens did not pay, or otherwise respond to, the invoice within forty-eight hours, the “request” was deemed approved. When the trial court entered the challenged orders, though, neither the parties, nor the trial court, had the benefit of our recent decision in All Insurance Restoration Services, Inc. v. Citizens Property Insurance Corp., 328 So. 3d 1057 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). All Insurance Restoration Services is controlling and compels us to reverse the challenged orders, and remand for the trial court to enter a final judgment for Citizens. Id. at 1061 (“Seeking payment of an invoice for services already rendered does not equate to requesting authorization to exceed the $3,000 limit. Therefore, although Citizen[s] is required to respond within forty-eight hours to a request to exceed the $3,000 limit for reasonable emergency measures, it is not required to respond to a demand for payment of an invoice for reasonable emergency measures already rendered to an insured. As such, the trial court properly entered final summary judgment in favor of Citizens and against AIRS because under the unambiguous language in the insurance contract, Citizens satisfied its contractual obligations when it submitted the $3,000 check to AIRS.”).
4 Reversed2 and remanded with instructions.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw