State Farm Florida Insurance v. Ramirez

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State Farm Florida Insurance v. Ramirez

86 So. 3d 1198, 2012 WL 1469963, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6650

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 30, 2012

DocketNo. 3D12-661

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 86 So. 3d 1198 (State Farm Florida Insurance v. Ramirez) 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

State Farm Florida Insurance v. Ramirez, 86 So. 3d 1198, 2012 WL 1469963, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6650 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

RAMIREZ, J.

This petition seeks a writ of certiorari quashing two orders in this action for a declaration of property insurance benefits and alleging breach of contract. There is no claim for bad faith against the insurer. We deny in part and grant in part the petition.

The first order dated February 9, 2012, simply directed petitioner to create a privilege log and provide the documents under seal for an in camera inspection. We deny the petition as to this order because it is premature. See Gaton v. Health Coalition, Inc., 774 So.2d 59, 60 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

The second order, dated March 7, 2012, however, compelled the petitioner to produce its entire claim file. This order departs from the essential requirements of law and will cause irreparable harm which cannot be remedied on appeal following final judgment. See Nationwide Ins. Co. of Fla. v. Demmo, 57 So.3d 982 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (stating claims file documents are protected from disclosure in a breach of contract action without a bad faith claim and the issue of coverage not yet resolved); accord Granada Ins. Co. v. Ricks, 12 So.3d 276, 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); Gov’t Employees Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez, 960 So.2d 794, 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).

Accordingly, we quash the order dated March 7, 2012, but at this time deny cer-tiorari as to the order dated February 9, 2012.

Certiorari granted in part, denied in part.

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

RAMIREZ, J.

This petition seeks a writ of certiorari quashing two orders in this action for a declaration of property insurance benefits and alleging breach of contract. There is no claim for bad faith against the insurer. We deny in part and grant in part the petition.

The first order dated February 9, 2012, simply directed petitioner to create a privilege log and provide the documents under seal for an in camera inspection. We deny the petition as to this order because it is premature. See Gaton v. Health Coalition, Inc., 774 So.2d 59, 60 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

The second order, dated March 7, 2012, however, compelled the petitioner to produce its entire claim file. This order departs from the essential requirements of law and will cause irreparable harm which cannot be remedied on appeal following final judgment. See Nationwide Ins. Co. of Fla. v. Demmo, 57 So.3d 982 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (stating claims file documents are protected from disclosure in a breach of contract action without a bad faith claim and the issue of coverage not yet resolved); accord Granada Ins. Co. v. Ricks, 12 So.3d 276, 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); Gov’t Employees Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez, 960 So.2d 794, 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).

Accordingly, we quash the order dated March 7, 2012, but at this time deny cer-tiorari as to the order dated February 9, 2012.

Certiorari granted in part, denied in part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 So. 3d 1198, 2012 WL 1469963, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6650, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-farm-florida-insurance-v-ramirez-fladistctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack