Tobin v. Sunshine State Insurance

777 So. 2d 1207, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 1819, 2001 WL 166834
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 21, 2001·No. No. 3D00-1201·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Because the insurance company did not actively participate in the lawsuit or take any action inconsistent with its contractual right to appraisal, we affirm the trial court’s order granting the motion to stay proceedings and compel appraisal. See Gonzalez v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 25 Fla. L. Weekly D2614, — So.2d -, 2000 WL 1671415 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Hill v. Ray Carter Auto Sales, Inc., 745 So.2d 1136 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); ARI Mutual Ins. Co. v. Hogen, 734 So.2d 574 (Fla. [1208]*12083d DCA 1999); Gray Mart, Inc. v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 703 So.2d 1170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Lapidus v. Arlen Beach Condominium Ass’n, Inc., 394 So.2d 1102 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Further, we find that the remaining issue raised by the insureds lacks merit.

Affirmed.

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

Tobin v. Sunshine State Insurance, 777 So. 2d 1207, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 1819, 2001 WL 166834 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

777 So. 2d 1207 (Tobin v. Sunshine State Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gonzalez v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co.
805 So. 2d 814 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Hill v. Ray Carter Auto Sales, Inc.
745 So. 2d 1136 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Lapidus v. ARLEN BEACH CON. ASSOC.
394 So. 2d 1102 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Gray Mart, Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins.
703 So. 2d 1170 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
ARI Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hogen
734 So. 2d 574 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)