Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1996

American Reliance Insurance Co. v. Martinez

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided November 6, 1996 · Cope, Levy, Shevin

683 So. 2d 575; 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11619; 1996 WL 637706 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Miller v. Scottsdale Ins. Co. (Fla. 2006)
Kathleen Miller v. Scottsdale Insurance Company (11th Cir. 2005)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

American Reliance Insurance Company appeals a final judgment entered pursuant to a jury verdict. We affirm the judgment find*576ing that, based on competent substantial evidence, the jury was entitled to determine that the Martinezes’ unilateral actions were insufficient to effectuate a cancellation of the American Reliance policy, Dedmon v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 408 So.2d 822 (Fla. 3d DCA1982), and to determine further that American Reliance breached the insurance contract. Cf. Jones v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co., 463 So.2d 1153 (Fla.l985)(jury can determine whether facts of ease fall within scope of coverage). The record demonstrates that American Reliance did not provide Fleet Real Estate Funding Corporation, the mortgagee and loss payee, with statutory notice of cancellation or notice of cancellation as required by the policy. See Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland v. First State Ins. Co., 677 So.2d 266 (Fla. 1996). The final judgment must therefore be affirmed.1

Appellant’s remaining points lack merit.

Affirmed.

. This disposition renders the cross-appeals moot.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.