State Farm Florida Insurance Company v. Phyllis C. Long
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledAugust 12, 2020
Docket3D19-1593
StatusPublished
๐ฐ News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed August 12, 2020.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D19-1593
Lower Tribunal No. 19-12609
________________
State Farm Florida Insurance Company,
Petitioner,
vs.
Phyllis C. Long,
Respondent.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade
County, John W. Thornton, Jr., Judge.
Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C., and Michael A.
Packer and Veronica N. Daniel (Fort Lauderdale); Link & Rockenbach, P.A., and
Kara Rockenbach Link and David A. Noel (West Palm Beach), for petitioner.
Alvarez, Feltman, Da Silva & Costa, P.L., and Paul B. Feltman, for
respondent.
Before EMAS, C.J., and HENDON and LOBREE, JJ.
HENDON, J.
For the reasons stated in State Farm Florida Insurance Co. v. Sanders, 45
Fla. L. Weekly D870 (Fla. 3d DCA Apr. 15, 2020), we deny the petition for writ of
certiorari. As in Sanders, we certify express conflict with the Fifth District Court
of Appealโs decisions in State Farm Florida Insurance Co. v. Cadet, 290 So. 3d
1090 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020), and State Farm Florida Insurance Co. v. Crispin, 290
So. 3d 150 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020), as well as the decision of the Fourth District
Court of Appeal in State Farm Florida Insurance Co. v. Valenti, 285 So. 3d 958
(Fla. 4th DCA 2019). Further, we also certify the same question certified in
Sanders as one of great public importance:
CAN A FIDUCIARY, SUCH AS A PUBLIC ADJUSTER OR
APPRAISER WHO IS IN A CONTRACTUAL AGENT-PRINCIPAL
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE INSUREDS AND WHO RECEIVES
A CONTINGENCY FEE FROM THE APPRAISAL AWARD, BE A
DISINTERESTED APPRAISER AS A MATTER OF LAW?
Petition denied; conflict certified; question certified.
2