PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY v. Shockley

951 So. 2d 20, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 1402, 2007 WL 397077
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 7, 2007
Docket4D06-4602
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 951 So. 2d 20 (PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY v. Shockley) 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
PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY v. Shockley, 951 So. 2d 20, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 1402, 2007 WL 397077 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

951 So.2d 20 (2007)

PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner,
v.
Stuart SHOCKLEY, Respondent.

No. 4D06-4602.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

February 7, 2007.

John J. Wilke of Wilke & Brooks, P.A., Boca Raton, and Robert I. Buchsbaum of Kramer, Green, Zuckerman, Greene and Buchsbaum, P.A., Hollywood, for petitioner.

John J. Hoffman of Hoffman & Morris, LLC, Singer Island, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Progressive seeks a writ of certiorari to quash the trial court's order denying its motion to dismiss a statutory claim for bad faith under sections 624.155 and 626.9541, Florida Statutes (2006). We grant the petition because both the existence of liability and the extent of damages are elements of a statutory cause of action for bad faith, and in this case the extent of damages has not been determined. In allowing this case to proceed before damages have been determined, the trial court has departed from the essential requirements of law. Blanchard v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 575 So.2d 1289 (Fla. 1991). For the reasons expressed by the first district in Vanguard Fire & Casualty *21 Co. v. Golmon, 31 Fla. L. Weekly D2835, ___ So.2d ___, 2006 WL 3299196 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov.15, 2006), we agree with Progressive that it will suffer irreparable harm, which includes discovery of its accident file, if it is forced to defend against both the UM claim and the bad faith claim simultaneously. We therefore grant the petition and remand for the trial court to either dismiss the bad faith claim or abate the bad faith claim until the UM claim is resolved.

KLEIN, SHAHOOD and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Citizens Property Ins. Corp. v. Calonge
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018
Adrian Fridman v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois
185 So. 3d 1214 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2016)
Gianassi v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
60 F. Supp. 3d 1267 (M.D. Florida, 2014)
Geico General Insurance Company v. Kelly Paton
150 So. 3d 804 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Safeco Insurance v. Fridman
117 So. 3d 16 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)
Geico General Insurance Co. v. Harvey
109 So. 3d 236 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Tranchese
49 So. 3d 809 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
21st Century Insurance Co. of California v. Morneau
46 So. 3d 1108 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Porcelli v. OneBeacon Ins. Co., Inc.
635 F. Supp. 2d 1312 (M.D. Florida, 2008)
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. O'HEARN
975 So. 2d 633 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
951 So. 2d 20, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 1402, 2007 WL 397077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/progressive-select-insurance-company-v-shockley-fladistctapp-2007.