ANTONIO CRUZ v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 8, 2023
Docket22-1252
StatusPublished

This text of ANTONIO CRUZ v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION (ANTONIO CRUZ v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
ANTONIO CRUZ v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, (Fla. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed March 8, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-1252 Lower Tribunal No. 18-24197 ________________

Antonio Cruz, Appellant,

vs.

Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Beatrice Butchko, Judge.

Virginia Best, PA, and Virginia M. Best (Ocala), for appellant.

Paul R. Pearcy, P.A., and Maureen G. Pearcy, for appellee.

Before SCALES, MILLER and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Kings Creek S. Condo, Inc.,

300 So. 3d 763, 765-66 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“Under a named perils insurance policy, [the insured] bore the burden to prove that wind, as a

covered cause of loss under the policy, caused the damage to the buildings.

. . . Because this is a named perils policy, if [the insured] fails to prove that

the damage resulted from a named peril, the damage is simply not covered.

Thus, [the insurer] is not required to prove a policy exclusion as the basis for

its defense.”); Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(c)(1)(A) (“A party asserting that a fact . .

. is genuinely disputed must support that assertion by . . . citing to particular

parts of materials in the record, including depositions, documents,

electronically stored information, affidavits or declarations, stipulations

(including those made for purposes of the motion only), admissions,

interrogatory answers, or other materials[.]”); Rich v. Narog, 47 Fla. L.

Weekly D1933, 2022 WL 4360601, at *6 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 21, 2022)

(determining that conclusory allegations in an affidavit without specific

supporting facts lacked the probative value necessary to defeat summary

judgment).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
ANTONIO CRUZ v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/antonio-cruz-v-citizens-property-insurance-corporation-fladistctapp-2023.