Valdez v. Consolidated Property & Casualty

762 So. 2d 1034, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 9406, 2000 WL 1021971
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 26, 2000·No. No. 3D99-2353·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Valdez appeals a final judgment voiding his insurance policy. For the following reasons, we affirm.

The insurance .policy contained a valid provision voiding the policy upon intentional concealment or misrepresentation by the insured. See Wong Ken v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 685 So.2d 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (clause which voids coverage for intentional misrepresentation is valid and enforceable). The jury found that Valdez violated that provision. Therefore, the trial court properly voided the insurance policy.

AFFIRMED.

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

Valdez v. Consolidated Property & Casualty, 762 So. 2d 1034, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 9406, 2000 WL 1021971 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

762 So. 2d 1034 (Valdez v. Consolidated Property & Casualty) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alvarez v. State Farm Florida Ins. Co.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2019
Lopes v. Allstate Indemnity Co.
873 So. 2d 344 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)