Preview
Case Number: CACE-21-007460 Division: 02
Filing # 124842898 E-Filed 04/13/2021 03:22:27 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN
AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION
CASE NO.
AMER JERDANA,
Plaintiff,
Vv.
CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE
CORPORATION,
Defendant.
/
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, Amer Jerdana, (“Plaintiff”) sues Defendant, Citizens Property Insurance
Corporation (“Defendant”), and he say:
The Parties
1. Plaintiff, Amer Jerdana is a resident of Broward County, Florida and is sui juris.
2. Citizens is an entity in the business of insurance, and it issues insurance policies
and otherwise conducts business in Broward County, Florida.
Jurisdiction and Venue
3. This court has subject matter jurisdiction because the amount in controversy
exceeds $30,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
4. Venue is proper in Broward County, Florida because the cause of action accrued in
Broward County, Florida.
1
LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC
*** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 04/13/2021 03:22:24 PM.****General Allegations
5. Plaintiff purchased and paid the premium for a policy of homeowners’ insurance
from Defendant, Policy Number 03754708 (the “Policy”), for the property located at 6651 SW 9
Street, Pembroke Pines, Florida 33023 (the “Insured Property.”) !
6. Upon information and belief, the Policy was an all risks policy of insurance.
7. Under Florida law, an insured seeking to recover under an “all risks” policy need
only show that while the policy was in force, a loss occurred to the insured’s property. That is all.
See Egan v. Washington General Insurance Corp., 240 So.2d 875 (Fla. 4" DCA 1970); Fayad v.
Clarendon National Insurance Co., 899 So. 2d 1082, 1085-1086 (Fla. 2005) (stating that this type
of policy provides coverage for all fortuitous loss or damage other than resulting from willful
misconduct or fraudulent acts).
8. An insured is not required to disprove any excepted clauses. Stonewall Insurance
Co. v. Emerald Fisheries, Inc., 388 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 3! DCA 1980); B & S Assoc. Inc. v. Indemnity
Cas. & Property, Lid., 641 So.2d 436 (Fla 4" DCA 1994) (“[I]t would appear that all risk insurance
arose for the very purpose of protecting the insured in those cases where difficulties of logical
explanation or some mystery surround the loss or damage to property. It would seem to be
inconsistent with the broad protective purposes of ‘all-risks’ insurance to impose on the insured,
as Insurer would have us do, the burden of proving precise cause of loss or damage.”)
9. Indeed, once the insured establishes a loss apparently within the terms of an all risks
policy, the burden shifts to the insurer. See East Florida Hauling, Inc. v. Lexington, Ins. Co., 913
So.2d 673 (Fla. 3" DCA 2005); U.S. Concrete Pipe Co. v. Bould, 437 Sp.2d 1061, 1065 (Fla.
Plaintiff does not have a true and complete copy of the Policy, but it is in Defendant’s possession. Plaintiff reserves
the right to supplement this Complaint by filing a copy of the Policy after one is provided by Defendant in response
to discovery requests being served herewith, or otherwise.
2
LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC1983) (if evidence raises questions as to whether entire claim is beyond coverage of policy, burden
is upon insurer to show that there is no coverage).
10. The Policy was in full force and effect at all relevant times to this lawsuit.
11. On or about November 9, 2020, wind and rain related to Tropical Storm ETA
caused direct and physical damages to the Insured Property.
12. The Plaintiff and/or an agent promptly reported the losses to Defendant, and made
a claim for insurance coverage and insurance benefits under the Policy.
13. Defendant was allowed full access to the Insured Property to inspect all losses
related to Tropical Storm ETA.
14. Defendant’s coverage decision and estimate failed to provide insurance coverage
for all losses, and further failed to indemnify Plaintiff for all losses resulting from the covered
claim referenced herein.
15. All conditions precedent to obtaining full coverage for the losses suffered by
Plaintiff and the Insured Property, for payment of insurance benefits due for the losses at issue
herein, and for the filing of this action have been fulfilled, satisfied, waived, or excused.
16. Plaintiff was forced to retain legal counsel in this matter and is obligated to pay
reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs for services rendered. Plaintiffis entitled to recover attorneys’
fees and costs in this action pursuant to Section 627.428, Fla. Stat.
Count]
(Breach of Contract)
17. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 16, as if fully set forth
herein, and further allege as follows:
18. This is a cause of action for breach of contract arising out of the Policy at issue in
this action.
3
LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC19. Upon information and belief, the Policy states, in relevant part, “We will provide
the insurance described in this policy in return for the premium and compliance with all applicable
provisions of this policy.”
20. Upon information and belief, the Policy further provides,
SECTION I — PERILS INSURED AGAINST
COVERAGE A — DWELLING and
COVERAGE B — OTHER STRUCTURES
We insure against risk of direct loss to property described in
Coverages A and B only if that loss is a physical loss to property. . .
x oe OK
A. Loss by Windstorm During a Hurricane With Respect to
Paragraphs C. and D., coverage for loss caused by the peril of
windstorm during a Hurricane which occurs anywhere in the state
of Florida, includes loss to: 1. The inside of a building; or 2. The
property we cover contained in a building cause by: a. rain; b.
Snow; c. Sleet; d. Hail; e. Sand; or f. Dust; if the direct force of the
windstorm first damages the building, causing an opening through
which the rain, snow, sleet, hail, sand or dust enters and causes
damage.
21. Upon information and belief, the Policy additionally provides, in pertinent part,
“We will initially pay at least the actual cash value of the insured loss, less any applicable
deductible...”
22. The losses sustained by the Insured Property due to Tropical Storm force winds and
rain are covered under the Policy. Accordingly, the above-referenced Policy provisions obligated
defendant to provide insurance coverage for all losses and to pay insurance benefits, including
initially to pay the full actual cash value (“ACV”) of all insured losses.
23. Defendant failed to provide insurance coverage and failed to issue payment of
benefits to address necessary repairs for all covered losses.
24. Plaintiff seeks insurance coverage and indemnification for all damages suffered as
a result of Tropical Storm wind and/or rain for which the Policy affords coverage.
4
LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC25. Defendant’s actions and the herein-referenced Policy provisions reveal that
Defendant breached the terms of the Policy and its conduct has caused substantial damages to
Plaintiff.
26. Defendant’s actions constitute material breaches of the Policy.
27. Plaintiff suffered losses as a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s conduct.
28. Plaintiff has complied with all obligations under the Policy, or such obligations
have been excused by the acts, representations, omissions, or conduct of Defendant.
Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully demands the entry of judgment by this Court stating:
a. that Plaintiff is entitled to insurance coverage and insurance benefits for all losses
sustained as a result of the covered insurance claim at issue herein;
b. that Defendant failed to pay the full insured losses in contravention of the Policy;
c. that Defendant’s actions were material breaches of the Policy;
d. that Plaintiff is entitled to costs and attorneys’ fees under Section 627.428, Fla. Stat.;
and
e. that Plaintiff is entitled to such further relief as this Court deems fair and just.
5
LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLCDemand for Jury Trial
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all matters that are so triable as a matter of
right.
Dated: April 13, 2021.
Law Offices of Marcote & Marcote De Moya, PLLC
Attorney for Plaintiff
12595 SW 137 Avenue
Suite 307
Miami, FL 33186
Tel. (305) 256-2616
Fax. (305) 256-2446
Primary Email:
urda@insurancelawadvocate.com
Secondary Email:
matthew.corrons@insurancelawadvocate.com
By:___/s/ Teresa J. Urda
Teresa J. Urda, Esq.
Fla. Bar No. 0049433
6
LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC
Preview
Case Number: CACE-21-007460 Division: 02 Filing # 124842898 E-Filed 04/13/2021 03:22:27 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO. AMER JERDANA, Plaintiff, Vv. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Defendant. / COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Amer Jerdana, (“Plaintiff”) sues Defendant, Citizens Property Insurance Corporation (“Defendant”), and he say: The Parties 1. Plaintiff, Amer Jerdana is a resident of Broward County, Florida and is sui juris. 2. Citizens is an entity in the business of insurance, and it issues insurance policies and otherwise conducts business in Broward County, Florida. Jurisdiction and Venue 3. This court has subject matter jurisdiction because the amount in controversy exceeds $30,000, exclusive of interest and costs. 4. Venue is proper in Broward County, Florida because the cause of action accrued in Broward County, Florida. 1 LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC *** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 04/13/2021 03:22:24 PM.****General Allegations 5. Plaintiff purchased and paid the premium for a policy of homeowners’ insurance from Defendant, Policy Number 03754708 (the “Policy”), for the property located at 6651 SW 9 Street, Pembroke Pines, Florida 33023 (the “Insured Property.”) ! 6. Upon information and belief, the Policy was an all risks policy of insurance. 7. Under Florida law, an insured seeking to recover under an “all risks” policy need only show that while the policy was in force, a loss occurred to the insured’s property. That is all. See Egan v. Washington General Insurance Corp., 240 So.2d 875 (Fla. 4" DCA 1970); Fayad v. Clarendon National Insurance Co., 899 So. 2d 1082, 1085-1086 (Fla. 2005) (stating that this type of policy provides coverage for all fortuitous loss or damage other than resulting from willful misconduct or fraudulent acts). 8. An insured is not required to disprove any excepted clauses. Stonewall Insurance Co. v. Emerald Fisheries, Inc., 388 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 3! DCA 1980); B & S Assoc. Inc. v. Indemnity Cas. & Property, Lid., 641 So.2d 436 (Fla 4" DCA 1994) (“[I]t would appear that all risk insurance arose for the very purpose of protecting the insured in those cases where difficulties of logical explanation or some mystery surround the loss or damage to property. It would seem to be inconsistent with the broad protective purposes of ‘all-risks’ insurance to impose on the insured, as Insurer would have us do, the burden of proving precise cause of loss or damage.”) 9. Indeed, once the insured establishes a loss apparently within the terms of an all risks policy, the burden shifts to the insurer. See East Florida Hauling, Inc. v. Lexington, Ins. Co., 913 So.2d 673 (Fla. 3" DCA 2005); U.S. Concrete Pipe Co. v. Bould, 437 Sp.2d 1061, 1065 (Fla. Plaintiff does not have a true and complete copy of the Policy, but it is in Defendant’s possession. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this Complaint by filing a copy of the Policy after one is provided by Defendant in response to discovery requests being served herewith, or otherwise. 2 LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC1983) (if evidence raises questions as to whether entire claim is beyond coverage of policy, burden is upon insurer to show that there is no coverage). 10. The Policy was in full force and effect at all relevant times to this lawsuit. 11. On or about November 9, 2020, wind and rain related to Tropical Storm ETA caused direct and physical damages to the Insured Property. 12. The Plaintiff and/or an agent promptly reported the losses to Defendant, and made a claim for insurance coverage and insurance benefits under the Policy. 13. Defendant was allowed full access to the Insured Property to inspect all losses related to Tropical Storm ETA. 14. Defendant’s coverage decision and estimate failed to provide insurance coverage for all losses, and further failed to indemnify Plaintiff for all losses resulting from the covered claim referenced herein. 15. All conditions precedent to obtaining full coverage for the losses suffered by Plaintiff and the Insured Property, for payment of insurance benefits due for the losses at issue herein, and for the filing of this action have been fulfilled, satisfied, waived, or excused. 16. Plaintiff was forced to retain legal counsel in this matter and is obligated to pay reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs for services rendered. Plaintiffis entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs in this action pursuant to Section 627.428, Fla. Stat. Count] (Breach of Contract) 17. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 16, as if fully set forth herein, and further allege as follows: 18. This is a cause of action for breach of contract arising out of the Policy at issue in this action. 3 LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC19. Upon information and belief, the Policy states, in relevant part, “We will provide the insurance described in this policy in return for the premium and compliance with all applicable provisions of this policy.” 20. Upon information and belief, the Policy further provides, SECTION I — PERILS INSURED AGAINST COVERAGE A — DWELLING and COVERAGE B — OTHER STRUCTURES We insure against risk of direct loss to property described in Coverages A and B only if that loss is a physical loss to property. . . x oe OK A. Loss by Windstorm During a Hurricane With Respect to Paragraphs C. and D., coverage for loss caused by the peril of windstorm during a Hurricane which occurs anywhere in the state of Florida, includes loss to: 1. The inside of a building; or 2. The property we cover contained in a building cause by: a. rain; b. Snow; c. Sleet; d. Hail; e. Sand; or f. Dust; if the direct force of the windstorm first damages the building, causing an opening through which the rain, snow, sleet, hail, sand or dust enters and causes damage. 21. Upon information and belief, the Policy additionally provides, in pertinent part, “We will initially pay at least the actual cash value of the insured loss, less any applicable deductible...” 22. The losses sustained by the Insured Property due to Tropical Storm force winds and rain are covered under the Policy. Accordingly, the above-referenced Policy provisions obligated defendant to provide insurance coverage for all losses and to pay insurance benefits, including initially to pay the full actual cash value (“ACV”) of all insured losses. 23. Defendant failed to provide insurance coverage and failed to issue payment of benefits to address necessary repairs for all covered losses. 24. Plaintiff seeks insurance coverage and indemnification for all damages suffered as a result of Tropical Storm wind and/or rain for which the Policy affords coverage. 4 LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC25. Defendant’s actions and the herein-referenced Policy provisions reveal that Defendant breached the terms of the Policy and its conduct has caused substantial damages to Plaintiff. 26. Defendant’s actions constitute material breaches of the Policy. 27. Plaintiff suffered losses as a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s conduct. 28. Plaintiff has complied with all obligations under the Policy, or such obligations have been excused by the acts, representations, omissions, or conduct of Defendant. Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully demands the entry of judgment by this Court stating: a. that Plaintiff is entitled to insurance coverage and insurance benefits for all losses sustained as a result of the covered insurance claim at issue herein; b. that Defendant failed to pay the full insured losses in contravention of the Policy; c. that Defendant’s actions were material breaches of the Policy; d. that Plaintiff is entitled to costs and attorneys’ fees under Section 627.428, Fla. Stat.; and e. that Plaintiff is entitled to such further relief as this Court deems fair and just. 5 LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLCDemand for Jury Trial Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all matters that are so triable as a matter of right. Dated: April 13, 2021. Law Offices of Marcote & Marcote De Moya, PLLC Attorney for Plaintiff 12595 SW 137 Avenue Suite 307 Miami, FL 33186 Tel. (305) 256-2616 Fax. (305) 256-2446 Primary Email: urda@insurancelawadvocate.com Secondary Email: matthew.corrons@insurancelawadvocate.com By:___/s/ Teresa J. Urda Teresa J. Urda, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 0049433 6 LAW OFFICES OF MARCOTE & MARCOTE DE MOYA, PLLC