Citizens Property Insurance Corp. v. Ifergane
114 So. 3d 190
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Citizens appeals three trial orders in a consolidated case against the Iferganes: (1) dismissal with prejudice of Alexandra Ifergane; (2) partial summary judgment for Haim Ifergane on coverage; (3) final judgment in favor of Haim.
- Policy insured a wind-only dwelling; Alexandra was the named insured; policy defined “you” to include the named insured and resident spouse.
- Hurricane Wilma caused property damage on October 25, 2005; Citizens investigated and sought EUOs and a sworn proof of loss.
- Alexandra divorced Haim and executed a quit claim in April 2006 assigning to Haim all rights in the property/insurance claim.
- Citizens alleged Alexandra failed to attend EUOs and resist assignment-related impediments; the insurer sought declaratory relief and coverage determinations.
- The trial court (a) granted Alexandra’s dismissal with prejudice, (b) granted Haim partial summary judgment on coverage, and (c) entered final judgment after appraisal in favor of Haim; on appeal, the first order was affirmed, the second and third reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Alexandra’s dismissal was proper given the Assignment. | Citizens contends assignment should not terminate Alexandra’s interest and joinder was required. | Alexandra had surrendered her rights via assignment; no justiciable controversy remained. | Affirmed; assignment valid and no live interest remained to justify joinder. |
| Whether Haim was entitled to summary judgment on coverage as resident spouse and innocent co-insured. | Haim was a resident insured and the assignment did not affect his rights; Alexandra’s duties could not be imputed to him. | Genuine facts about residency precluded summary judgment; assignment did not relieve Alexandra’s duties. | Reversed; genuine issues of material fact about residency precluded summary judgment. |
| Whether Alexandra’s post-loss obligations (EUO) survived the Assignment and were enforceable against her. | Citizens maintains EUO was required of Alexandra regardless of assignment. | Assignment shifted benefits but not duties; the EUO obligation remained with the named insured. | Reversed; EUO requirement remained a condition precedent to coverage; failure to comply precluded recovery. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bethel v. Security National Insurance Co., 949 So.2d 219 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (joinder requirements in declaratory actions; actual interest needed)
- Conde v. Allstate Ins. Co., 595 So.2d 1005 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (injured parties are essential in insurer's declaratory action)
- Paulekas v. Independent Fire Insurance Co., 633 So.2d 1111 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (injured claimants not bound by insurer’s coverage determination when not joined)
- Meadows Cmty. Ass’n v. Russell-Tutty, 928 So.2d 1276 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (declaratory relief requires bona fide need and live controversy)
- Boulevard Nat’l Bank of Miami v. Air Metal Indus., Inc., 176 So.2d 94 (Fla.1965) (assignment requires intent; who transfers rights and accepts)
- Marlin Diagnostics v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 897 So.2d 469 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (duty to attend EUO does not transfer with assignment absent assent)