Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1996–2011 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Harco National Insurance Co. v. Roblesgreen2 sentences2011Co. v. Robles, 685 So.2d 1288 (Fla.1996) (holding an appraisal clause was not void for lack of mutuality due to a retained rights clause based on the holding in Li cea). 2011Ins. *485 Co. v. Robles, 685 So.2d 1288 (Fla.1996) (holding an appraisal clause was not void for lack of mutuality due to a retained rights clause based on the holding in Licea ). | 1 | 2 |
American Reliance v. Village Homesgreen2 sentences2002Relying on Judge Cope's dissent in American Reliance Insurance Co. v. Village Homes at Country Walk, 632 So.2d 106 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), this Court found that the purpose of the retained rights clause was "to state, quite simply, that if the insured requests appraisal and the insurer proceeds with the appraisal process, the insurer has not *1025 thereby abandoned any coverage defenses which may be available to it." Licea, 685 So.2d at 1287 (quoting Village Homes, 632 So.2d at 108 (Cope, J., dissenting)). 2002Relying on Judge Cope's dissent in American Reliance Insurance Co. v. Village Homes at Country Walk, 632 So.2d 106 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), this Court found that the purpose of the retained rights clause was "to state, quite simply, that if the insured requests appraisal and the insurer proceeds with the appraisal process, the insurer has not *1025 thereby abandoned any coverage defenses which may be available to it." Licea, 685 So.2d at 1287 (quoting Village Homes, 632 So.2d at 108 (Cope, J., dissenting)). | 1 | 2 |
New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. J. H. Blackshear, Inc.green2 sentences2000Blackshear, Inc., 116 Fla. 289 , 156 So. 695, 696 (1934), for the proposition that "the law does not require an insured to submit to a purely speculative appraisal of damages as to which it may be contended no liability at all exists." In Paradise Plaza Condominium Ass'n v. Reinsurance Corp. of New York, 685 So.2d 937 , 940 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), which this court cited with approval in Keelean , the Third District noted that Blackshear was "decisively distinguishable" because Blackshear "did not involve a policy provision that submission to appraisal does not waive coverage defenses." (Empha 2000Blackshear, Inc., 116 Fla. 289 , 156 So. 695, 696 (1934), for the proposition that "the law does not require an insured to submit to a purely speculative appraisal of damages as to which it may be contended no liability at all exists." In Paradise Plaza Condominium Ass'n v. Reinsurance Corp. of New York, 685 So.2d 937 , 940 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), which this court cited with approval in Keelean , the Third District noted that Blackshear was "decisively distinguishable" because Blackshear "did not involve a policy provision that submission to appraisal does not waive coverage defenses." (Empha | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. Licea
green
2 sentences2011In Licea , the Florida Supreme Court held that an appraisal provision was not void for lack of mutuality where the policy contained a retained rights clause. 685 So.2d 1285, 1286 . 2011For the reasons discussed, we hold that the appraisal clause at issue is not void for lack of mutuality of obligation simply because of a retained rights clause, where we interpret the clause as retaining only the right to dispute the issues of coverage as to the whole loss, or whether the policy conditions have been violated as specified above. 685 So.2d at 1288 . | 3 | 2000–2011 |
PARADISE PLAZA v. Reinsurance Corp.
green
1 sentence2000Blackshear, Inc., 116 Fla. 289 , 156 So. 695, 696 (1934), for the proposition that "the law does not require an insured to submit to a purely speculative appraisal of damages as to which it may be contended no liability at all exists." In Paradise Plaza Condominium Ass'n v. Reinsurance Corp. of New York, 685 So.2d 937 , 940 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), which this court cited with approval in Keelean , the Third District noted that Blackshear was "decisively distinguishable" because Blackshear "did not involve a policy provision that submission to appraisal does not waive coverage defenses." (Empha | 1 | 2000–2000 |