Navigation

Tag: Florida


Florida’s Supreme Court Resolves Conflicting Appellate Court Decisions on Concurrent CausationDec 12, 2016

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…

Read More »
Yours, Mine, and Ours: Florida Court Holds Wrap Exclusion Applies Equally to Named and Additional InsuredDec 07, 2016

Gregory Podolak (SDV Southeast Managing Partner) has a new article in Insurance Matters, the newsletter of the Florida Bar’s Insurance and Surety Committee: In today’s construction market, large-scale projects are commonly insured under consolidated insurance (“wrap-up”) programs, where the owner, general contractor, and most subcontractors are covered under the same primary and excess liability policies. This scheme functions as an alternative to traditional risk transfer, which relies on the individual…

Read More »
Fla. Policyholders Gain Slight Edge In Property Damage CasesDec 02, 2016

In breaking news yesterday, LAW360.com posted “the Florida Supreme Court ruled that policyholders may obtain coverage for an entire property insurance claim where there are multiple concurrent causes of loss and at least one is covered under a policy, agreeing with a decades-old precedential appellate decision.” Today, LAW360 gave a detailed analysis of the decision, and asked Gregory Podolak for his input… Greg Podolak, managing partner of Saxe Doernberger &…

Read More »
Policyholders Beware: Wrap Exclusions Will Be Broadly InterpretedOct 27, 2016

A Florida court recently denied a policyholder’s attempt to distinguish between a named insured and an additional insured in order to simultaneously obtain coverage and escape from an OCIP exclusion. This case presents a cautionary tale for additional insureds because absent some ambiguity within an insurance policy, a court will enforce the literal language of the policy. Click here to read the case alert.  

Read More »
Florida Supreme Court: Insurer Bad Faith Not Needed for Attorney’s FeesOct 14, 2016

SDV Southeast Managing Partner Gregory Podolak has another new article out this week, this one for Insurance Matters, the newsletter of the Florida Bar’s Insurance and Surety Committee: Florida’s insurance attorney fee recovery statute – Fla. Stat. § 627.428 – has long been a policyholder litigation tool designed to level the playing field between the resource and experience rich insurance industry, and its policyholder counterparts. The latest challenge to its…

Read More »
New Case Alert: Florida Supreme Court Denies Review of Appeals Court’s “Ensuing Loss” InterpretationOct 10, 2016

The Florida Supreme Court recently denied review of an appellate decision interpreting a policy’s “ensuing loss” exception to require a separate loss, entirely independent from the original excluded loss. This decision creates a challenge for Florida policyholders, particularly in the construction defect realm. Where an excluded loss is present, policyholders must carefully evaluate their coverage.  If the excluded loss cannot be separated from the subsequent, covered loss, the entire damage…

Read More »
SDV Opens Southeast OfficeJul 14, 2016

We are pleased to announce the opening of our new Southeast office in Naples, Florida. “SDV is dedicated to the prevention and resolution of insurance disputes,” said Managing Partner, Tracy Alan Saxe. “With the explosive growth of clients in the region, we felt it vital to have a physical presence in order to best continue our mission of providing exceptional service.” SDV partner Gregory D. Podolak has been named Managing…

Read More »
Insurance Cases to Watch in the Second Half of 2016Jun 24, 2016

Today’s edition of Insurance Law360.com discusses a number of the cases we have been covering in the SDV blog. Partner Gregory D. Podolak was quoted on the following cases: On Sebo v. American Home Assurance Co. Inc. – The case offers the Florida Supreme Court the chance to clearly articulate whether the concurrent cause or efficient proximate cause should govern first-party property insurance cases in the state, said Saxe Doernberger…

Read More »
Court Affirms Fees Award for Chasing Coverage Despite Policyholder LyingJan 20, 2016

Florida’s Third District Court of Appeals recently held that, despite a jury finding that the homeowners intentionally misrepresented material facts, the insurer was required to pay attorney fees after the insurer lost its counter-claim against the homeowners. In Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Bascuas, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 15183 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist. Oct. 14, 2015), there was a finding of fact, in the trial court, that the…

Read More »
Contractor Appeals FL District Court Interpretation of “Suit”Aug 20, 2015

Coverage under commercial general liability (CGL) policies for construction defects is laden with issues, with insureds often needing to litigate basic policy terms. One such issue that has recently come to the forefront in Florida involves a CGL insurer’s obligation to defend a non-litigation, yet statutorily mandated, dispute resolution process. CGL policies require insurers to defend their insureds against a “suit.” “Suit” is generally defined as a “civil proceeding,” including…

Read More »
Catching Up on SDV Case AlertsMay 27, 2015

In the past two months, we’ve released three new Case Alerts for your review. Click the titles to read the entire alert. Court Broadly Interprets Pollution Exclusion to Bar Coverage for Nontraditional Pollution Under CGL There is a tremendous division, and no clear consensus, among courts regarding whether the pollution exclusion applies only to losses arising from traditional environmental pollution. For example, New York and Nevada have held that the…

Read More »
Eleventh Circuit Chimes in on Florida’s Trigger of Coverage DebateMay 01, 2015

The debate rages on in Florida regarding the appropriate trigger rule for progressive or latent property damage under commercial general liability (“CGL”) policies.  Recently, the Eleventh Circuit weighed in, rejecting the manifestation trigger and holding that the injury-in-fact trigger applied to determine available coverage in a construction defect case.  As a result, the court focused on when the damage actually occurred rather than when the damage was discovered.  For a…

Read More »