Florida’s Supreme Court Resolves Conflicting Appellate Court Decisions on Concurrent Causation

What happens when a policyholder suffers a loss caused by multiple perils, but not all perils are covered? On one hand, Florida’s Second District Court of Appeals has ruled that there should be no coverage under the efficient proximate cause doctrine. On the other hand, Florida’s Third District Court of Appeals has held that pursuant to the concurrent clause doctrine, there should be coverage.

So which is the right theory of coverage?

Click here to read our newest case alert and find out how the Supreme Court of Florida came to their decision.




Dec 12, 2016

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *