Castle Key Insurance Company v. Mark Fischer
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledMarch 16, 2021
Docket1D20-1621
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D20-1621
_____________________________
CASTLE KEY INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Appellant,
v.
MARK FISCHER,
Appellee.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County.
Frances S. King, Judge.
March 16, 2021
OSTERHAUS, J.
Castle Key Insurance Company appeals a nonfinal order
denying its motion to abate litigation and compel appraisal. Castle
Key argues that appraisal is appropriate because it accepted
partial coverage on the insured’s claim. We agree and reverse.
Mark Fischer filed a claim with his insurer, Castle Key, after
his Panama City property sustained damage from Hurricane
Michael. Castle Key tendered a check admitting coverage for some
damage while declining to cover damage to fences, trees, and
landscape attached to the property. Fischer tendered a proof of loss
much higher than Castle Key’s estimate, and Castle Key
demanded appraisal pursuant to the homeowner’s insurance
policy. Fischer then sued Castle Key, and Castle Key moved to
abate the litigation and compel appraisal. The trial court denied
the motion.
We review a nonfinal order denying a motion to compel
appraisal de novo. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. Sheppard, 268 So.
3d 1006, 1007 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (citing MKL Enters. LLC v. Am.
Traditions Ins. Co., 265 So. 3d 730, 731 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)).
Here, Castle Key paid a portion of the claim by tendering a
check to Fischer but denied coverage for other damage to the
property. Like our decisions in Sheppard and MKL Enterprises,
the insurer did not “wholly deny” coverage, and thus appraisal is
appropriate and should not have been denied. See Sheppard, 268
So. 3d at 1007 (reversing trial court’s denial of motion to compel
appraisal where insurer paid for water damage but declined to
cover costs of repairing leaky pipes that caused the water damage);
MKL Enters., 265 So. 3d at 731 (finding insurer did not “wholly
deny” coverage because it tendered a check, admitting coverage for
some damage while declining to cover all repair costs).
We also reject Fischer’s waiver and ripeness arguments.
Castle Key did all it needed to do before demanding appraisal and
did not act inconsistently with its appraisal right. It promptly
investigated Fischer’s claim, partially accepted coverage, and
tendered a check. Later, it sent a mediation notice at the first
indication of a dispute between the parties after receiving a letter
of representation from Fischer’s counsel. See State Farm Fla. Ins.
Co. v. Lime Bay Condo., Inc., 187 So. 3d 932, 936 (Fla. 4th DCA
2016) (recognizing that the mediation notice requirement in
§ 627.7015(2), Florida Statutes, ripens only after the insurer is put
on notice that there is a dispute involving a material issue of fact);
People’s Tr. Ins. Co. v. Lavadie, 306 So. 3d 285, 290 (Fla. 3d DCA
2020) (same). Castle Key then demanded appraisal within one
week after the filing of Fischer’s proof of loss showing the parties
to be far apart on the issue of the amount of the loss.
Accordingly, we REVERSE the trial court’s order denying
Castle Key’s motion to abate litigation and discovery and compel
appraisal and REMAND with instructions to enter an order
granting Castle Key’s motion.
2
B.L. THOMAS and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
Scot E. Samis of Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP, St.
Petersburg; David Molhem of Molhem & Fraley, P.A., Tampa, for
Appellant.
Chad A. Barr and Virginia E. Davis Horton of the Law Office of
Chad A. Barr, P.A., Altamonte Springs, for Appellee.
3