Insurance
Insurance – Compulsory Medical Examination. Whether an insured’s refusal to comply with policy’s requirement that she submit to a compulsory medical exam constitutes her failure to satisfy a condition precedent to recovery pursuant to the underinsured/uninsured benefits in the insurance policy. The Fifth District reversed her award, reasoning that “[h]er refusal constitutes a breach of the policy that prohibits her recovery.” State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Curran, No. SC12-157 (review granted February 29, 2012). DCA decision --- So. 3d ---, (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), Nos. 5D09-1488, 5D09-2091). Status: briefing; Oral Argument to be set by separate order.
Insurance – Public Adjusters. Is section 626.854(6), Florida Statutes, which bans solicitation by public adjusters for a period of 48 hours, narrowly tailored to meet its objectives, or is it a ban on all solicitation for 48 hours which is a restriction on commercial speech in violation of Article I, section 4 of the Florida Constitution? Atwater v. Kortum, No. SC11-133 (review granted May 13, 2011). DCA decision: 54 So. 3d 1012 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). Status: decision pending; Oral Argument Video
First Party Insurance Liability - Claims Handling: Questions certified by Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals: (1) "Does Florida law recognize a claim for breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing by an insured based on the insurer's failure to investigate and assess the insured's claim within a reasonable period of time?" (2) "If Florida law recognizes a claim for breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing based on an insurer's failure to investigate and assess its insured's claim within a reasonable period of time, is the good faith and fair dealing claim subject to the same bifurcation requirement applicable to a bad faith claim under Fla. Stat. Sec. 624.155?" (3) "May an insured bring a claim against an insurer for failure to comply with the language and type-size requirements established by Fla. Stat. Sec. 627.701(4)(a)?" (4) Does an insurer's failure to comply with the language and type-size requirements established by Fla. Stat. Sec. 627.701(4)(a) render a noncompliant hurricane deductible provision in an insurance policy void and unenforceable?" and (5) "Does language in an insurance policy mandating payment of benefits upon 'entry of a final judgment' require an insurer to pay its insured upon entry of judgment at the trial level?" Chalfonte Condo Apt. Ass'n v. QBE Ins. Corp., No. SC09-441 (review granted Mar. 11, 2009). 11th Cir. decision: 561 F.3d 1267 (11th Cir. 2009). Status: decision pending; Oral Argument Video.
