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