GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY
v.
GLASSCO, INC.
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 Eleventh Circuit held that violations of the Florida Motor Vehicle Repair Act do not void repair invoices or preclude payment, and section 559.921(1) does not grant insurance companies a cause of action for failure to provide a written estimate.
[1] The Florida Motor Vehicle Repair Act does not grant an insurance company a cause of action when a repair shop fails to provide a written repair estimate.
[2] Violations of the Florida Motor Vehicle Repair Act do not void a repair invoice for completed windshield repairs and preclude a repair shop from receiving payment for inv…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceInsurance companies sued a repair shop for alleged violations of the Florida Motor Vehicle Repair Act. The Eleventh Circuit certified two questions to…
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 Florida Motor Vehicle Repair Act cases and more on FLexlaw
As we explained in our opinion, plaintiffs Government Employees Insurance Company, GEICO Indemnity Company, and GEICO General Insurance Company "conceded that if a court determines that the alleged Repair Act violations do not void the repair invoice and preclude [defendant] Glassco from receiving any payment, all eight counts in the operative complaint fail." Glassco, 85 F. 4th at 1140. Thus, even if the plaintiffs had a cause of action under the Repair Act, that claim would fail on the merits along with all the other claims raised in their operative complaint. See id. at 1140, 1145.
We express our gratitude to the Florida Supreme Court for the clear and dispositive answers it has provided in response to these questions. As a result of its decision, we affirm the judgment of the district court dismissing Count 8 of the complaint and granting summary judgment in favor of Glassco on Counts 1 through 7 of the complaint.