Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. University at 107th Avenue, Inc.
Cases that cite this one
10 later published cases cite this decision.
- 200 Leslie Condominium Ass'n v. QBE Insurance (United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida 2013)
- Biscayne Cove Condominium Ass'n v. QBE Insurance (United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida 2013)
- Clockwork PH3, LLC v. Clear Blue Specialty Insurance Company (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2023)
- Sunlight Lands LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2024)
- Triton Renovation, Inc. v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2021)
- Gulfside, Inc. v. Lexington Insurance Company (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2021)
- Gulfside, Inc. v. Lexington Insurance Company (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2021)
- Castillo at Tiburon Condominium Association, Inc. v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2021)
- Gulfside, Inc. v. Lexington Insurance Company (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2020)
- Diamond Lake Condominium Association, Inc. v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2020)
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
Scottsdale Insurance Company appeals the entry of a partial summary judgment in favor of its insured, University at 107th Avenue, Inc., in which Scottsdale was ordered to submit to an appraisal. Scottsdale argues that University failed to provide the post-loss information required by the insurance policy. Scottsdale thus contends that the order referring this matter to appraisal was premature, until such time as Scottsdale received the information necessary for Scottsdale to evaluate University’s claim. Because Scottsdale had sufficient information upon which to evaluate University’s claim for damages, we affirm.
In 1999, University suffered hurricane damage and filed a claim for damages with Scottsdale. Scottsdale inspected University’s property and denied University’s claim because its independent adjuster estimated the damages well below University’s claim.
“[T]he nature of the post-loss obligations is merely to provide the insurer with an independent means by which to determine the amount of loss, as opposed to relying solely on the representations of the insured.” United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Romay, 744 So.2d 467, 471 n. 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). It cannot be said in this case that the insurer did not have sufficient information from which to assess its insured’s claim.
Subsequent to January 24, 2000, the day on which Scottsdale first denied University’s claim, University provided Scottsdale with a Sworn Proof of Loss, and produced its corporate representative and sole shareholder for an examination under oath. Additionally, at the summary judgment hearing, Scottsdale’s counsel admitted that Scottsdale had obtained what
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.