PEOPLE'S TRUST INSURANCE COMPANY v. ANTONIO J. SOCARRAS AND RACHEL SOCARRAS
This text of PEOPLE'S TRUST INSURANCE COMPANY v. ANTONIO J. SOCARRAS AND RACHEL SOCARRAS (PEOPLE'S TRUST INSURANCE COMPANY v. ANTONIO J. SOCARRAS AND RACHEL SOCARRAS) 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.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed November 18, 2020. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D19-1767 Lower Tribunal No. 18-24447 ________________
People's Trust Insurance Company, Appellant,
vs.
Antonio J. Socarras and Rachel Socarras, Appellees.
An Appeal from non-final orders from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Reemberto Diaz, Judge.
Brett Frankel and Jonathan Sabghir (Deerfield Beach); Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., and Mark D. Tinker (Tampa), for appellant.
Marin, Eljaiek, Lopez, & Martinez, P.L., and Steven E. Gurian, for appellees.
Before FERNANDEZ, SCALES, and HENDON, JJ.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See People’s Trust Ins. Co. v. Ortega, 2020 WL 3443454, at *3
(Fla. 3d DCA June 24, 2020) (“We have held that when an insurer reasonably
disputes whether an insured has sufficiently complied with a policy's post-loss
conditions so as to trigger the policy’s appraisal provision, a question of fact is
created that must be resolved by the trial court before the trial court may compel
appraisal. United Prop. & Cas. Ins. v. Concepcion, 83 So. 3d 908, 910 (Fla. 3d DCA
2012) (citing Citizens Prop. Ins. v. Gutierrez, 59 So. 3d 177 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011);
Citizens Prop. Ins. v. Mango Hill Condo. Ass'n 12 Inc., 54 So. 3d 578 (Fla. 3d DCA
2011); Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Maytin, 51 So. 3d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)).”);
Am. Integrity Ins. Co. v. Estrada, 276 So. 3d 905, 914 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“[W]hile
the interpretation of the terms of an insurance contract normally presents an issue of
law, the question of whether certain actions constitute compliance with the contract
often presents an issue of fact. See State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. Figueroa, 218 So. 3d
886, 888 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (‘Whether an insured substantially complied with
policy obligations is a question of fact.’ (emphasis added); Solano v. State Farm Fla.
Ins. Co., 155 So. 3d 367, 371 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (‘A question of fact remains as
to whether there was sufficient compliance with the cooperation provisions of the
policy to provide State Farm with adequate information to settle the loss claims or
go to an appraisal, thus precluding a forfeiture of benefits owed to the insureds.’)
(emphasis added).”).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
PEOPLE'S TRUST INSURANCE COMPANY v. ANTONIO J. SOCARRAS AND RACHEL SOCARRAS, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peoples-trust-insurance-company-v-antonio-j-socarras-and-rachel-socarras-fladistctapp-2020.