Preview
Filing # 166482469 E-Filed 02/09/2023 01:15:00 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX
KEVIN FRANKLIN,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, a
foreign profit corporation,
Defendant.
/
DEFENDANT, SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, RESPONSE TO
PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS
Defendant, Safeco Insurance Company Of Illinois, by and through the undersigned
attorneys and in accordance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.370, hereby files this
Response to Request for Admissions and states as follows:
1. At all times material to this action, Defendant was and is a foreign profit
corporation licensed to do business in Jacksonville, Duval County, Florida, and engaged in the
business of automobile insurance.
RESPONSE: Admit, for jurisdictional purposes only.
2. Defendant maintains agents in Jacksonville, Duval County, Florida to transact its
customary business in Duval County, Florida.
RESPONSE: Admit, for jurisdictional purposes only.
3. Defendant insured KEVIN FRANKLIN under an automobile insurance policy
which provides Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Protection benefits for the motor vehicle
accident which is the subject of Plaintiff’s complaint.
Case No.: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX
Franklin, Kevin v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois
Defendant’s Response to Request for Admissions
Page 1 of 4
ACCEPTED: DUVAL COUNTY, JODY PHILLIPS, CLERK, 02/09/2023 01:45:32 PM
RESPONSE: Admit. However, Defendant maintains that Plaintiff is not yet contractually
entitled to the benefits sought within the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
4. That a copy of the insurance information sheet attached to the Request for
Admissions accurately reflects the automobile insurance coverage issued by Defendant, which
was in full force and effect for the subject accident.
RESPONSE: Admit. However, Defendant maintains that Plaintiff is not yet contractually
entitled to the benefits sought within the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
5. That a copy of the insurance information sheet attached to the Request for
Admissions accurately reflects the automobile coverage issued by Defendant, which provides
coverage for Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Protection benefits for the personal injuries
Plaintiff sustained in the subject accident.
RESPONSE: Admit. However, Defendant maintains that Plaintiff is not yet contractually
entitled to the benefits sought within the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
6. Plaintiff has available UM coverage through the vehicle listed on the declaration
page attached to the Request for Admissions.
RESPONSE: Admit. However, Defendant maintains that Plaintiff is not yet contractually
entitled to the benefits sought within the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
7. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff’s Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Protection
claim without “reasonable proof to establish” that Defendant was not responsible for the
payment.
RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
8. KEVIN FRANKLIN’s policy with Defendant is required to conform to all
requirements of Sections 627.727, Florida Statutes.
RESPONSE: Admit.
9. KEVIN FRANKLIN’s policy with Defendant, even if it does not by its own terms
comply with the requirements set forth in Sections 627.727 Florida Statutes, is deemed to
provide insurance for the payment of the required benefits and should be interpreted to meet the
other requirements set forth in Florida Statutes.
Case No.: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX
Franklin, Kevin v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois
Defendant’s Response to Request for Admissions
Page 2 of 4
RESPONSE: Admit.
10. A multiplier of the Lode Star for Attorneys’ fees would be appropriate if Plaintiff
has a contingent fee contract with the undersigned law firm.
RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof
thereof.
11. Five Hundred Fifty Dollars ($500.00) per hour is a reasonable hourly rate for the
undersigned law firm to charge based on the charges customarily charged in this community for
the same or similar services.
RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof
thereof.
12. Liability for the accident remains solely with the underinsured driver, Jeffrey
Stewart.
RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof
thereof.
13. That no comparative negligence lies with the Plaintiff for the subject accident.
RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof
thereof.
14. The Defendant’s proper name is SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
ILLINOIS.
RESPONSE: Admit.
15. Please admit that Plaintiff was injured in the subject accident.
RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof
thereof.
Case No.: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX
Franklin, Kevin v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois
Defendant’s Response to Request for Admissions
Page 3 of 4
16. Please admit that Plaintiff suffered a permanent injury within a reasonable degree
of medical probability resulting from the subject accident.
RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
17. Please admit that Plaintiff incurred medical expenses for treatment of injuries
resulting from the subject accident.
RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that the foregoing document has been furnished to Brandi A. Gartrell, Esquire,
Morgan & Morgan, 501 Riverside Ave, Suite 1200, Jacksonville, FL 32202, Primary E-Mail:
bgartrell@forthpeople.com, Secondary E-mail: lharralson@forthepeople.com, by e-mail on this
9th day of February, 2023.
Law Offices of J. Christopher Norris
PO Box 7217
London, KY 40742
Telephone: (407) 563-3416
Attorney for Defendant, Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois
JORDAN D. BROUGHER, FBN #1036574
Primary E-mail (eservice only): OrlandoLegalMail@LibertyMutual.com
Secondary E-mail: jordan.brougher@libertymutual.com
Case No.: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX
Franklin, Kevin v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois
Defendant’s Response to Request for Admissions
Page 4 of 4
Preview
Filing # 166482469 E-Filed 02/09/2023 01:15:00 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX KEVIN FRANKLIN, Plaintiff, vs. SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, a foreign profit corporation, Defendant. / DEFENDANT, SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS Defendant, Safeco Insurance Company Of Illinois, by and through the undersigned attorneys and in accordance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.370, hereby files this Response to Request for Admissions and states as follows: 1. At all times material to this action, Defendant was and is a foreign profit corporation licensed to do business in Jacksonville, Duval County, Florida, and engaged in the business of automobile insurance. RESPONSE: Admit, for jurisdictional purposes only. 2. Defendant maintains agents in Jacksonville, Duval County, Florida to transact its customary business in Duval County, Florida. RESPONSE: Admit, for jurisdictional purposes only. 3. Defendant insured KEVIN FRANKLIN under an automobile insurance policy which provides Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Protection benefits for the motor vehicle accident which is the subject of Plaintiff’s complaint. Case No.: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX Franklin, Kevin v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois Defendant’s Response to Request for Admissions Page 1 of 4 ACCEPTED: DUVAL COUNTY, JODY PHILLIPS, CLERK, 02/09/2023 01:45:32 PM RESPONSE: Admit. However, Defendant maintains that Plaintiff is not yet contractually entitled to the benefits sought within the Plaintiff’s Complaint. 4. That a copy of the insurance information sheet attached to the Request for Admissions accurately reflects the automobile insurance coverage issued by Defendant, which was in full force and effect for the subject accident. RESPONSE: Admit. However, Defendant maintains that Plaintiff is not yet contractually entitled to the benefits sought within the Plaintiff’s Complaint. 5. That a copy of the insurance information sheet attached to the Request for Admissions accurately reflects the automobile coverage issued by Defendant, which provides coverage for Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Protection benefits for the personal injuries Plaintiff sustained in the subject accident. RESPONSE: Admit. However, Defendant maintains that Plaintiff is not yet contractually entitled to the benefits sought within the Plaintiff’s Complaint. 6. Plaintiff has available UM coverage through the vehicle listed on the declaration page attached to the Request for Admissions. RESPONSE: Admit. However, Defendant maintains that Plaintiff is not yet contractually entitled to the benefits sought within the Plaintiff’s Complaint. 7. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff’s Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Protection claim without “reasonable proof to establish” that Defendant was not responsible for the payment. RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. 8. KEVIN FRANKLIN’s policy with Defendant is required to conform to all requirements of Sections 627.727, Florida Statutes. RESPONSE: Admit. 9. KEVIN FRANKLIN’s policy with Defendant, even if it does not by its own terms comply with the requirements set forth in Sections 627.727 Florida Statutes, is deemed to provide insurance for the payment of the required benefits and should be interpreted to meet the other requirements set forth in Florida Statutes. Case No.: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX Franklin, Kevin v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois Defendant’s Response to Request for Admissions Page 2 of 4 RESPONSE: Admit. 10. A multiplier of the Lode Star for Attorneys’ fees would be appropriate if Plaintiff has a contingent fee contract with the undersigned law firm. RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof thereof. 11. Five Hundred Fifty Dollars ($500.00) per hour is a reasonable hourly rate for the undersigned law firm to charge based on the charges customarily charged in this community for the same or similar services. RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof thereof. 12. Liability for the accident remains solely with the underinsured driver, Jeffrey Stewart. RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof thereof. 13. That no comparative negligence lies with the Plaintiff for the subject accident. RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof thereof. 14. The Defendant’s proper name is SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS. RESPONSE: Admit. 15. Please admit that Plaintiff was injured in the subject accident. RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations contained and demands strict proof thereof. Case No.: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX Franklin, Kevin v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois Defendant’s Response to Request for Admissions Page 3 of 4 16. Please admit that Plaintiff suffered a permanent injury within a reasonable degree of medical probability resulting from the subject accident. RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. 17. Please admit that Plaintiff incurred medical expenses for treatment of injuries resulting from the subject accident. RESPONSE: Defendant denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that the foregoing document has been furnished to Brandi A. Gartrell, Esquire, Morgan & Morgan, 501 Riverside Ave, Suite 1200, Jacksonville, FL 32202, Primary E-Mail: bgartrell@forthpeople.com, Secondary E-mail: lharralson@forthepeople.com, by e-mail on this 9th day of February, 2023. Law Offices of J. Christopher Norris PO Box 7217 London, KY 40742 Telephone: (407) 563-3416 Attorney for Defendant, Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois JORDAN D. BROUGHER, FBN #1036574 Primary E-mail (eservice only): OrlandoLegalMail@LibertyMutual.com Secondary E-mail: jordan.brougher@libertymutual.com Case No.: 16-2022-CA-006098-XX Franklin, Kevin v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois Defendant’s Response to Request for Admissions Page 4 of 4