148 So. 3d 488
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2014Background
- FIGA appeals an order compelling appraisal of a sinkhole loss under the Brancos' homeowner's policy.
- FIGA argues appraisal was improper because the dispute concerns method of repair, not the amount of loss.
- The Brancos alleged a covered sinkhole loss; HomeWise denied coverage, later insolvency led FIGA to assume defense and payment obligations.
- FIGA conceded a covered loss in April 2013; Brancos demanded appraisal shortly thereafter and sought a stay to allow neutral evaluation.
- The policy's appraisal clause allows each side to appoint disinterested appraisers; if no agreement, an umpire is used; disputes about scope of repairs may affect loss amount.
- The trial court ordered appraisal proceedings, including accepting one of the Brancos' attorneys as an appraiser, which the court later partially reversed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the dispute is over amount of loss or method of repair. | FIGA asserts it's a repair-method dispute, not an amount-of-loss dispute. | Brancos contend the scope/method of repair affects the loss amount and falls within appraisal. | Appraisal may determine method/scope of repairs affecting loss amount. |
| Waiver of appraisal by Brancos' litigation activity. | FIGA claims Brancos waived appraisal by pursuing suit and discovery. | Brancos acted inconsistently with waiver only if their conduct shows intent to abandon appraisal rights. | Brancos did not waive their appraisal right. |
| Whether a party-appointed attorney can serve as a disinterested appraiser. | FIGA contends attorney cannot be disinterested due to attorney-client relationship. | Brancos rely on Rios v. Tri-State Ins. Co. and related authorities permitting attorneys to serve. | Attorney Marshall may not serve as disinterested appraiser; reversal in that regard. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzalez v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 805 So.2d 814 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d) (premature appraisal not required when coverage is denied)
- Chimerakis v. Sentry Ins. Mut. Co., 804 So.2d 476 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d) (arbitration/appraisal distinctions; right to appraisal when conditions precedent are met)
- Castilla v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n, 18 So.3d 703 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 4th) (waiver of arbitration/appraisal rights; review de novo of waiver questions)
- Gastro v. Mango Hill Condo. Ass’n, 117 So.3d 1226 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d) (appraisal scope includes interpretation of repair/extent in loss evaluation)
- Demetrescu v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 137 So.3d 502 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 4th) (appraisal standards; de novo review of legal questions)