Lexington Insurance Co. v. Bhandari

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lexington Insurance Co. v. Bhandari

807 So. 2d 727, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1153, 2002 WL 181145

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 6, 2002

DocketNo. 3D01-540

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 807 So. 2d 727 (Lexington Insurance Co. v. Bhandari) 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

Lexington Insurance Co. v. Bhandari, 807 So. 2d 727, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1153, 2002 WL 181145 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

SHEVIN, Judge.

Lexington Insurance Company appeals a final judgment in favor of insureds Ram-das and Chitra Bhandari. We affirm, in part, and reverse, in part.

Lexington sued the Bhandaris for breach of contract and return of insurance proceeds based on their alleged material misrepresentations on a supplemental loss claim. The trial court properly granted summary judgment as the record does not show any material misrepresentations by the insureds. Cf. Wong Ken v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 685 So.2d 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (summary judgment proper as to whether insured made material misrepresentation as a matter of law). We, therefore, affirm that portion of the judgment. However, we reverse the prejudgment interest award. Insureds are not entitled to pre-judgment interest from the date of the loss under the circumstances of this case. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Blanco, 791 So.2d 515 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Allstate Ins. Co. v. Martinez, 790 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), review granted, No. SC01-1622, 805 So.2d 804 (Fla. Jan. 15, 2002); Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Alvarez, 785 So.2d 700 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)(holding that Aries Ins. Co. v. Hercas Corp., 781 So.2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), does not conflict with Independent Fire Ins. Co. v. Lugassy, 593 So.2d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)), review denied, 800 So.2d 612 (Fla.2001). On remand, the trial court shall award interest from the date of the appraisal award.

Affirmed, in part; reversed, in part; and cause remanded.

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

SHEVIN, Judge.

Lexington Insurance Company appeals a final judgment in favor of insureds Ram-das and Chitra Bhandari. We affirm, in part, and reverse, in part.

Lexington sued the Bhandaris for breach of contract and return of insurance proceeds based on their alleged material misrepresentations on a supplemental loss claim. The trial court properly granted summary judgment as the record does not show any material misrepresentations by the insureds. Cf. Wong Ken v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 685 So.2d 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (summary judgment proper as to whether insured made material misrepresentation as a matter of law). We, therefore, affirm that portion of the judgment. However, we reverse the prejudgment interest award. Insureds are not entitled to pre-judgment interest from the date of the loss under the circumstances of this case. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Blanco, 791 So.2d 515 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Allstate Ins. Co. v. Martinez, 790 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), review granted, No. SC01-1622, 805 So.2d 804 (Fla. Jan. 15, 2002); Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Alvarez, 785 So.2d 700 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)(holding that Aries Ins. Co. v. Hercas Corp., 781 So.2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), does not conflict with Independent Fire Ins. Co. v. Lugassy, 593 So.2d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)), review denied, 800 So.2d 612 (Fla.2001). On remand, the trial court shall award interest from the date of the appraisal award.

Affirmed, in part; reversed, in part; and cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

807 So. 2d 727, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1153, 2002 WL 181145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lexington-insurance-co-v-bhandari-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack