NETHERLANDS INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
MARY FOWLER, 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.
An insurance company appeals a judgment requiring it to pay the full face amount of a fire insurance policy ($10,000) despite appraising fire damage at only $4,619.69. The court held that because fire damage rendered the building unrepairable and subject to city demolition order, this constituted a total loss under Florida's Valued Policy Law, triggering full policy payment regardless of the actual repair costs.
The court held that the building sustained a total loss under the circumstances, and the Valued Policy Law applied, requiring the insurance company to pay the full face amount of $10,000. The loss was total because the fire damage rendered the building unrepairable without finding as to what repairs could avoid the city's condemnation order.
“we must first determine if the insured has sustained a loss as a result of the fire, which is the peril insured against as defined in Springfield Fire and Marine Insurance Co. v. Boswell, Fla.App.1964, 167 So.2d 780. Secondly, we must determine if the loss to the insured was total.”
Establishes the court's two-step analytical framework for determining when total loss applies under fire insurance policies
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA building insured under a fire insurance policy for $10,000 was severely damaged by fire. The City condemned the building as unrepairable and dangero…
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 Valued Policy Law cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal by Netherlands Insurance Company, Defendant, from a final judgment ordering payment of the insured value of $10,000 to the insured, Mary Fowler, Plaintiff, under a fire insurance contract. The action was tried before the judge sitting without a jury.
The subject policy provided coverage to the extent of the actual cash value at the time of the loss, but not exceeding the amount it would cost to repair or replace the property with materials of like kind and quality and without any allowance for increased costs of repair or construction by reason of any ordinance or law regulating «construction or repair.
The insured building was severely damaged by fire, and the City refused to allow the building to be repaired and ordered it •demolished upon the premise that it was unrepairable and dangerous. The insurance company appraised the damage caused by fire at $4,619.69, and tendered this amount. The insured refused to accept the tender and sued for $10,000.00 face amount of the policy. The trial judge found that the insured was entitled to be compensated upon the basis of total destruction of the building.
The insurer contends that the trial court incorrectly applied F.S.A. Sec. 627.0801(1), in that said statute involves “total loss by ■fire” and that the building here was only partially destroyed by fire. It further contends that the fire damage was repairable, that the total destruction of the building was caused by operation of city building codes rather than the fire, that the exculpatory clause in the contract excludes liability for losses occasioned by ordinances regulating construction.
The insured contends, on the other hand, that the fire was the cause of the condition of the building '‘which prompted its condemnation by the City, and that under the Valued Policy Law, F.S.A. Sec. 627.0801(1), the insurance company was, liable for the face amount of the policy.
The parties have not found nor have we been able to find a ruling directly on this question by the appellate courts of this State. Therefore, we must first determine if the insured has sustained a loss as a result of the fire, which is the peril insured against as defined in Springfield Fire and Marine Insurance Co. v. Boswell, Fla.App.1964, 167 So.2d 780. Secondly, we must determine if the loss to the insured was total. The fire damaged the building to the extent that the City found it unrepairable without any finding as to what repairs, if any, could be made to avoid the order of condemnation.
We agree with the trial court which found the building a total loss under the circumstances of this case, and that the value policy statute applied, F.S.A. 627.0801(1). Rutherford v. Royal Insurance Co., Ltd., 4 Cir. 1926, 12 F.2d 880, 49 A.L.R. 814. Mondzelwski v. Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Corp., 1954, 48 Del. 441, 105 A.2d 787. Also see cases collected under the annotation in 90 A.L.R.2d 790. There are holdings to the contrary, including, Hewins v. London Assurance Corporation, Mass.1930, 184 Mass. 177, 68 N.E. 62, which we have carefully considered.
Affirmed.
ALLEN, C. J., and SMITH,-SHERMAN N., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. v. COX, 967 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2007)…otal loss but was only responsible for a relatively small amount of the damage. The First District’s majority relies on Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Boswell, 167 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964), and Netherlands Insurance Co. v. Fowler, 181 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966). We do not find that these cases deal with the issue in this case. Rather, in both of the cases, the decisions found coverage because the losses were caused by a covered peril for which a premium was charged and paid. Finally, th…
-
Zennon Mierzwa v. Fla. Windstorm Underwriting Ass'n, 877 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…9, 410 (1900)). Barnes established that an ordinance can convert a partial loss into a total loss for the purpose of recovery under an insurance policy. Although Barnes did not involve the valued policy statute, Netherlands Insurance Co. v. Fowler, 181 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966), is a case where the valued policy law trumped the insurance company’s claim that a policy exclusion prevented an ordinance from converting a partial loss into a total one. In Netherlands, a policy declared that the insurer would…
-
Fla. Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. v. COX, 943 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…binson, Farm Bureau owes the full amount of the policy, inasmuch as the Coxes’ home was a total loss, in not insignificant part7 as the result of windstorm damage. The Second District reached a similar result in Netherlands Insurance Co. v. Fowler, 181 So. 2d 692, 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966), where fire only partially destroyed an insured building, but another excluded peril-there the operation of a municipal ordinance-also came into play, combining with the fire damage to render the structure a total loss: Munic…
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
- Springfield Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Brady B. Boswell and Dora Lee Boswell, 167 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Rutherford v. Royal INS. Co., 12 F.2d 880 (4th Cir. 1926)