Florida property insurance claims Tag Archives

A significant part of our firm’s work focuses on representing property owners in claims against their insurance carriers. We regularly counsel and represent property owners, including condominium associations, in claims involving weather/wind and nonweather water damage, fire/smoke damage, and damage to common elements such as pools, parking garages, elevators, roofs, etc.

Only rarely do such cases go to trial, but in recent months our firm’s insurance attorneys secured jury verdicts in favor of claimants involving very typical nonweather water losses. Shareholders Susan C. Odess, Stuart Sobel and Nicholas Siegfried, together with associate Zachary T. Smith, recently pursued cases against State Farm and Universal over their refusal to adequately cover damages stemming from broken water pipes and leaks.

The three Miami-Dade Circuit Court jury verdicts we secured in these suits are excellent examples of the types of cases that our firm’s insurance attorneys successfully handle on behalf of our clients. We will now pursue the recovery of our attorneys’ fees and costs against these carriers. Of equal import, we will be filing separate actions on behalf of the policyholders for all of the prevailing cases to assert a claim for bad faith. While these claims involved homeowners, we often secure similar results for condominium associations and HOAs for comparable water-loss claims.

Firm partner B. Michael Clark, Jr. authored a guest column that appeared as a “Board of Contributors” feature in today’s edition of the Daily Business Review, South Florida’s exclusive business daily and official court newspaper. The article, which was titled “Court Upholds Concurrent Cause Doctrine in Win for Property Policyholders,” focused on the positive ramifications for Florida commercial and residential insurance policyholders of the state Supreme Court’s recent decision in the case of Sebo v. American Home Assurance. Michael’s article reads:

The recent Supreme Court of Florida decision in Sebo v. American Home Assurance rejecting the “efficient proximate cause doctrine” in favor of the “concurrent cause doctrine” for property insurance claims represents a significant win for residential and commercial policyholders.

The state’s highest court has determined that the appropriate theory of recovery for claims in which two or more perils contribute to a loss but at least one of the perils is excluded from coverage is the concurrent cause doctrine. Under the rejected efficient proximate cause theory, when multiple perils cause a loss, it is the efficient cause — the one that sets the other in motion — to which the loss is attributed.

For the insurance industry, the efficient proximate cause doctrine has always been preferred. If the carriers are able to demonstrate that the efficient cause behind a loss is excluded from coverage under the policy, then the entire claim may be denied.

Sebo makes the concurrent cause doctrine the legal standard to be applied for property insurance claims in Florida. Now insurers must cover a loss even if the covered peril is the secondary cause of the loss, which was concurrent with but not the primary or efficient cause.

Articles Tagged with Florida property insurance claims

Firm Secures Jury Verdicts Against Insurance Carriers

Article Authored by Michael Clark in Today’s Daily Business Review: “Court Upholds Concurrent Cause Doctrine in Win for Property Policyholders”