Geico General Insurance Co. v. Harvey
109 So. 3d 236
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- GEICO petitions for certiorari after a trial court denied its motion to dismiss a third-party insurance bad faith crossclaim in a tort action.
- The underlying case involved a wrongful death claim from an August 2006 automobile accident; the decedent’s estate obtained a jury verdict against Harvey for $8 million, well above the $100,000 policy limit.
- GEICO insured Harvey; the estate joined GEICO as a defendant under Florida’s nonjoinder statute (627.4136) which allows insurer joinder for entering final judgment or enforcing settlement.
- Harvey asserted a crossclaim against GEICO for insurance bad faith, arguing GEICO failed to settle timely and failed to notify about presuit statements.
- GEICO sought dismissal or severance of the bad faith crossclaim on grounds it did not arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the tort action and that bad faith claims are not proper in a tort action.
- The court ultimately granted certiorari, holding that third-party insurance bad faith cannot be brought in the underlying tort action and must be pursued separately.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a third-party insurance bad faith crossclaim may be brought in a tort action. | GEICO: not authorized; bad faith claim separate from tort. | Harvey: inconsistent with joinder procedures; related to settlement handling. | Not authorized; must be pursued in a separate action. |
| Whether the denial of the motion to dismiss the bad faith crossclaim violated removal rights. | GEICO: denial forecloses federal removal; warrants certiorari. | Harvey: not argued here; focus is on joinder and accrual. | Denial violated removal rights; certiorari granted to quash. |
| Whether the bad faith crossclaim accrues in the same transaction as the underlying tort action. | GEICO: accrual tied to coverage issues post-judgment. | Harvey: crossclaim arises from insurer’s bad-faith handling of the third-party claim. | Accrual occurs separately; does not arise from the same occurrence. |
| Whether the nonjoinder statute permits insurer joinder solely for entering final judgment or enforcing settlement, thus precluding a bad-faith crossclaim in the tort action. | GEICO: nonjoinder allows joinder for final judgment; prevents bad faith crossclaims in tort. | Harvey: joinder should support the crossclaim in tort action. | Nonjoinder permits only final-judgment/settlement enforcement; bad faith crossclaim not allowed in tort action. |
| Whether prior case law supports abating or dismissing a bad-faith crossclaim in a concurrent action. | GEICO: bad faith claims can be abated/dismissed in coverage context. | Harvey: misalignment with first/third-party bad faith distinctions. | Bad faith crossclaim not authorized in this posture; must be pursued separately. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gen. Star Indem. Co. v. Boran Craig Barber Engel Constr. Co., 895 So.2d 1136 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (insurance availability should not influence jury findings)
- Merchants & Businessmen’s Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bennis, 636 So.2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (policy against disclosure of insurance to the jury)
- De-Meo v. Frenchy’s Worldwide Helmets, Inc., 732 So.2d 12 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (insurer denied coverage excludes joinder as party)
- Blanchard v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 575 So.2d 1289 (Fla. 1991) (bad faith claim is separate from contract to perform)
- Vest v. Travelers Ins. Co., 753 So.2d 1270 (Fla. 2000) (bad faith premature when coverage issues unresolved)