State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. Patrick, 93-2779
| Decision Date | 14 December 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 93-2779,93-2779 |
| Citation | 647 So.2d 983 |
| Parties | 19 Fla. L. Weekly D2595 STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, et al., Appellants, v. Charles B. PATRICK, et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Hardeman & Suarez, P.A., Richard A. Warren, Miami, for appellants.
Michael S. Grossman & Assoc., P.A., and Jamie Grossman, Coconut Grove, for appellees.
Before BARKDULL, JORGENSON and GERSTEN, JJ.
State Farm Fire and Casualty Company appeals from an order of partial summary judgment in favor of Charles B. Patrick and Charles B. Patrick, P.A. The trial court found that State Farm had wrongfully withheld $2,854.41 in depreciation from losses incurred as a result of Hurricane Andrew. We reverse.
Patrick had a replacement cost insurance policy on his property with State Farm. The insurance company estimated the cost of repair or replacement as $14,207.28. State Farm paid $11,102.87, withholding $250 for the deductible and $2,854.41 as "depreciation." Under the policy, State Farm was obligated to pay the withheld amount once the work was completed and Patrick had submitted a claim. Patrick, acting as his own contractor, finished the work for $11,034.86. State Farm refused his request to pay the additional amount as per the estimate. Patrick sued and recovered the judgment now on appeal. We hold that the trial court erred as a matter of law in ignoring the plain language of the replacement cost policy.
Replacement cost insurance is designed to cover the difference between what property is actually worth and what it would cost to rebuild or repair that property. It is insurance on a property's depreciation. Leo L. Jordan, What Price Rebuilding?, 19 ABA Fall Brief 17 (1990). Courts have almost uniformly held that an insurance company's liability for replacement cost does not arise until the repair or replacement has been completed. Id.; see, e.g., Tamco Corp. v. Federal Ins. Co. of New York, 216 F.Supp. 767 (N.D.Ill.1963). Patrick's contract provides that State Farm "will not pay for any loss on a replacement cost basis until the lost or damaged property is actually repaired or replaced...."
Patrick argues that the partial withholding until the repair work is completed is prohibited by section 627.702(2), Florida Statutes (1991), and Florida caselaw. However, section 627.702(2) is not applicable because it covers only partial loss from fire or lightning; this case deals with wind damage. 1 The caselaw cited by Patrick is similarly inapplicable. In the absence of a specific prohibition to the contrary, the language of the contract is controlling.
Patrick also argues that State Farm should pay the total amount the insurance company estimated it would...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marquez v. Nat'l Fire & Marine Ins. Co.
...between what property is actually worth and what it would cost to rebuild or repair that property." State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Patrick , 647 So. 2d 983, 983 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). Replacement cost "is measured by what it would cost to replace the damaged structure on the same premises." Dav......
-
Tonn Family Ltd. Agric. P'ship v. W. Agric. Ins. Co., 120,933
...and that the alleged limitation on the amount of the award was an issue presented at trial. Moreover, in State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Patrick , 647 So. 2d 983 (Fla. App. 1994), the replacement cost issue was raised in a motion for summary judgment filed prior to trial.Similarly, in Hug......
-
Allen v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., CA 98-1226-MJ-C.
...to application of deductible to coverage for windstorm damage resulting from Hurricane Frederic); State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Patrick, 647 So.2d 983 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1994) (property damaged by Hurricane Andrew was insured for replacement cost, less deductible); Gregory v. Continental Ins.......
-
Colorado Cas. Ins. Co. v. Sammons
...stated. Higgins v. Insurance Co. of North America, 256 Or. 151, 469 P.2d 766, 774 (Or.1970); see also State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Patrick, 647 So.2d 983, 984 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1994). Furthermore, Sammons can point to no policy provision that requires Colorado Casualty to adjust the claim b......
-
Actual Cash Value Estimates Need To Be Made In Florida—How A Church Lost To Church Mutual
...See Buckley Towers Condo., Inc. v. QBE Ins. Corp., 395 Fed.Appx. 659, 662-64 (11th Cir. 2010); State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Patrick, 647 So.2d 983, 984 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (cited with approval in Ceballo v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 967 So. 2d 811, 815 (Fla. 2007)). This Court has rule......
-
Florida's "valued policy" law: the eye of the storm.
...lightning only, the insurer must pay "the actual amount of such loss." However, as noted in State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Patrick, 647 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), reh. denied, a partial loss due to windstorm is not subject to the In Patrick, the insurer paid the insured actual cash......