Laird v. Chicago Insurance Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Laird v. Chicago Insurance Co.

227 So. 2d 230

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 21, 1969

DocketNo. 69-202

StatusPublished

This text of 227 So. 2d 230 (Laird v. Chicago Insurance Co.) 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

Laird v. Chicago Insurance Co., 227 So. 2d 230 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Agnes Laird, plaintiff below, appeals from a final judgment for the defendant, Chicago Insurance Company. The judgment was entered upon a jury verdict for the defendant.

Appellant presents nine points on appeal. Each of these points urges error upon the trial of the issue created by the defendant’s answer that appellant’s claim was barred by an alleged failure to make proof of loss under the policy. This issue was submitted to the jury. It is appellant’s position that the defendant insuance company waived its right to proof of loss by continuing to negotiate with her until the time for filing proof of loss had passed.

An insurance company may by its conduct waive its right to receive timely proof of loss. See Indian River State Bank v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 46 Fla. 283,35 So. 228 (1903); Mutual Ben. Health & Accident Ass’n v. Bunting, 133 Fla. 646, 183 So. 321 (1938). However we are unable to hold that appellant has demonstrated reversible error because she has not furnished us with a transcript of the testimony or evidence at the trial. We are unable to say that the issue of failure to make proof of loss was not presented by the evidence, nor are we able to say that the issue of waiver was presented by the evidence. Therefore the judgment must be affirmed under the rule stated in Brown v. Householder, Fla.App.1961, 134 So.2d 801; Crosby v. Stubblebine, Fla.App.1962, 142 So.2d 358; Short v. Short, Fla.App. 1964, 162 So.2d 538.

Affirmed.

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

Agnes Laird, plaintiff below, appeals from a final judgment for the defendant, Chicago Insurance Company. The judgment was entered upon a jury verdict for the defendant.

Appellant presents nine points on appeal. Each of these points urges error upon the trial of the issue created by the defendant’s answer that appellant’s claim was barred by an alleged failure to make proof of loss under the policy. This issue was submitted to the jury. It is appellant’s position that the defendant insuance company waived its right to proof of loss by continuing to negotiate with her until the time for filing proof of loss had passed.

An insurance company may by its conduct waive its right to receive timely proof of loss. See Indian River State Bank v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 46 Fla. 283,35 So. 228 (1903); Mutual Ben. Health & Accident Ass’n v. Bunting, 133 Fla. 646, 183 So. 321 (1938). However we are unable to hold that appellant has demonstrated reversible error because she has not furnished us with a transcript of the testimony or evidence at the trial. We are unable to say that the issue of failure to make proof of loss was not presented by the evidence, nor are we able to say that the issue of waiver was presented by the evidence. Therefore the judgment must be affirmed under the rule stated in Brown v. Householder, Fla.App.1961, 134 So.2d 801; Crosby v. Stubblebine, Fla.App.1962, 142 So.2d 358; Short v. Short, Fla.App. 1964, 162 So.2d 538.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 So. 2d 230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laird-v-chicago-insurance-co-fladistctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack