(813) 253-0097contact

Blog

  • The Bad Faith Trial – A New Defense Perspective

    While researching  “reported” jury verdicts on bad faith matters I ran across a  striking statistic: roughly 87% of the reported decisions were favorable to Plaintiff’s. Any kind of bad faith trial, especially an insurer’s defense verdict seems to be a rare commodity these days. With increased training for claims staff over the last several years (see SHM’s list of Florida approved seminars) I question why these cases are still settled after reviewing claim files and the underlying defense attorney’s file.  As we know, those on the Plaintiff’s side will not be putting down their legal briefs or marketing their services to other plaintiff’s lawyers without a real reason to do so. The following will be an ongoing blog entry on a trial of the bad faith claim and how the training and preparation of the same will assist the entire insurance industry from more of these claims in the future. Continue reading »

  • Wolf vs. Progressive

    In the case of Wolf vs. Progressive, 35Fla. L. Weekly D733(Fla. 1st DCA 2010), the District Court held that a Plaintiff who sued for UM Benefits was not entitled to them simply because he did not receive notice of the availability of UM Benefits on a six month notice of renewal.  According to the 1st District, “We do not read the plain language of sectio...

    Continue reading »

  • Florida Law Update

    The Supreme Court of Florida addressed an important bad faith issue in the Perrara v. United States Fidelity and Guarantee Company, matter on May 6, 2010.  The case came to the Supreme Court after the Eleventh Circuit certified the following question to the Supreme Court: “May a cause of action for third-party bad faith against an indemnity insurer be ma...

    Continue reading »

  • Florida Law Update

    In the Holland v. Barfield matter, the Fifth District Court of Appeal determined that in a wrongful death case the trial case erred in compelling a defendant to produce all computer hard drives and all cellphone SIM cards as the Order did not protect against disclosure of confidential and privileged information, nor did it establish a limit or time frame. ...

    Continue reading »