arrow left
arrow right
  • MASHBURN, DOUGLAS JR vs. FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY INSURANCE CLAIM document preview
  • MASHBURN, DOUGLAS JR vs. FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY INSURANCE CLAIM document preview
  • MASHBURN, DOUGLAS JR vs. FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY INSURANCE CLAIM document preview
  • MASHBURN, DOUGLAS JR vs. FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY INSURANCE CLAIM document preview
  • MASHBURN, DOUGLAS JR vs. FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY INSURANCE CLAIM document preview
  • MASHBURN, DOUGLAS JR vs. FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY INSURANCE CLAIM document preview
  • MASHBURN, DOUGLAS JR vs. FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY INSURANCE CLAIM document preview
  • MASHBURN, DOUGLAS JR vs. FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY INSURANCE CLAIM document preview
						
                                

Preview

Filing # 93963484 E-Filed 08/09/2019 05:01:54 PM. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 14™ JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BAY COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 19003043CA DOUGLAS MASHBURN, JR. AND ANGELA MASHBURN, Plaintiffs, vs. FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. / PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT & DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL COME NOW, Plaintiffs, DOUGLAS MASHBURN, JR. AND ANGELA MASHBURN (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”), by and through the undersigned counsel, and hereby files this Complaint against Defendant, FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY (hereinafter “Defendant” or “FedNat’”), and as grounds therefore, states as follows: 1, This is an action for damages in excess of FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($15,000.00), exclusive of interest, attorneys’ fees and costs, and is otherwise within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. 2. At all times material hereto, Plaintiffs, DOUGLAS MASHBURN, JR. AND ANGELA MASHBURN, is and were sui juris and have resided in Bay County, Florida. 3. At all times material hereto, Defendant is and was engaged in the business of issuing and servicing insurance policies in Bay County, Florida. 4. At all times material hereto, the damaged property is and was located in Bay County, Florida.5. At all times material hereto, Plaintiffs and Defendant had a policy of insurance, Policy No. FE-0000420878-06 (“Contract”). Plaintiffs are not in possession of a complete certified copy of the Contract; however, Defendant has a copy of the Contract. Plaintiffs have requested a formal copy of the Contract through a Request to Produce which has been served upon Defendant contemporaneously with this Complaint. See Equity Premium, Inc. v. Twin City Fire Ins. Co., 956 So, 2d 1257 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Amiker v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 398 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. Ist DCA. 1981); Parkway General Hospital Inc. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 393 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1981). 6. The Plaintiffs have paid the premiums for the contract. 7. In exchange, the Contract provided insurance during Hurricane Michael for the property located at 908 Pelican Place, Panama City Beach, FL 32407. COUNT I—- BREACH OF CONTRACT 8. Plaintiffs reallege and reincorporate paragraphs 1-7 as if fully stated herein, and further alleges as follows: 9. On or about October 10, 2018 and during the above contract period, the insured property sustained direct physical damages as a result of Hurricane Michael. 10. These direct physical damages are covered under the contract. 11. The Plaintiffs have provided prompt notice of the physical damages to the Defendant. 12. No exclusions under the contract apply to the physical damages. 13. No limitations under the contract apply to the physical damages. 14. Defendant acknowledged the claim, by and through its agents, employees or assigns, and assigned claim number HO0518270774 to the loss. 15. Defendant afforded coverage for the claim.16. Defendant paid policy benefits on the claim after making reductions based on policy provisions. 17. Through its payment on the claim, Defendant admitted liability for the loss. 18. | However, Defendant’s payment on the claim is inadequate to repair Plaintiffs’ property to its pre-loss condition as a result of the loss. 19. It is undisputed that the insured Plaintiffs and Defendant entered into a written contract, the policy, wherein Plaintiffs agreed to pay a premium and Defendant agreed to insure the subject property. 20. Defendant had a duty under the subject insurance contract to fully compensate Plaintiffs for all losses covered under the subject policy. 21. Further, all conditions precedent to payment of the claim have occurred, have been performed, have otherwise been satisfied by Plaintiffs, or have been waived by Defendant. 22. Defendant breached the policy by its failure and refusal to make full and proper payment of insurance proceeds to Plaintiffs which caused corresponding financial damage. 23. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s breach of contract, Plaintiffs have been required to retain the services of the undersigned attorneys to represent and protect the interests of Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs have become obligated to pay them a reasonable fee for their services in bringing this action. 24. In the event that the Plaintiffs prevail in this action, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to section 626.9373 and 57.041, Florida Statutes and/or other applicable Florida Law.WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs, DOUGLAS MASHBURN, JR. AND ANGELA MASHBURN, demands judgment against Defendant, FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY, for damages, including, but not limited to, damages owed under the contract, interest, attorneys’ fees and costs, and for any such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. The Plaintiffs demand trial by jury of all issues so triable. COUNT II — DECLARATORY RELIEF 25. Plaintiffs reallege and reincorporate paragraphs 1-7 as if fully stated herein, and further alleges as follows: 26. During the above contract period, the insured property sustained direct physical damages. 27. Plaintiffs and Defendant had a binding contract that insured the property during the aforementioned period. 28. Section 86.011, Florida Statutes, gives the court jurisdiction to render a declaratory judgment on the existence or nonexistence of (1) a right under the insurance contract or (2) a fact upon which the existence or nonexistence of such right under the insurance contract depends. See Higgins y. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 894 So. 2d 5, 12 (Fla. 2004) (declaratory action allowed to decide disputes in respect to insurance policy indemnity and defense obligations). 29. Pursuant to Chapter 86 of the Florida Statutes, the Plaintiffs request this Court to take jurisdiction over this action and determine the Plaintiffs’ rights under the contract. 30. Plaintiffs provided prompt notice of the physical damages that occurred during the contract period. 31. Defendant assigned claim number HO0518270774.32. Defendant has failed to provide complete coverage for the physical damages that occurred during the contract period. 33. This has created a bona fide, actual, present practical need for the requested declarations as it deals with a present, ascertained or ascertainable state of facts or present controversy as to the above state of facts. 34. Asa direct and proximate result of Defendant’s position, the Plaintiffs have been required to retain the services of the undersigned attorneys to represent and protect the interests of the Plaintiffs and the Plaintiffs have become obligated to pay them a reasonable fee for their services in bringing this action. 35. In the event that the Plaintiffs prevail in this action, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to section 626.9373 and 57.041, Florida Statutes and/or other applicable Florida Law. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs, DOUGLAS MASHBURN, JR. AND ANGELA MASHBURN, hereby demand a declaration as to the following: a. that the Court take jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action; b. that the Court determine the rights and duties of the parties under the contract; c. that overhead and profit is owed on Plaintiffs’ claim; d. that the Court award the Plaintiffs interest, attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to section 626.9373 and 57.041, Florida Statutes and/or other applicable Florida law; and e. for any such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL The Plaintiffs further demand a trial by jury of all issues so triable as a matter of right.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the Summons, Complaint, Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions to Defendant, Plaintiffs’ Set of Interrogatories, Plaintiffs’ Request for Production, Plaintiffs’ Notice of Taking Video Deposition Duces Tecum of Defendant’s Designated Corporate Representative, Plaintiffs’ Notice of Taking Video Deposition Duces Tecum of Defendant’s Desk Adjuster and Plaintiffs’ Notice of Taking Video Deposition Duces Tecum of Defendant’s Field Adjuster have been sent to the process server for service. DATED this 9" day of August, 2019. BY: GED LAWYERS, LLP Attorneys for the Plaintiffs 7171 North Federal Highway Boca Raton, FL 33487 Telephone: (561) 995-1966 Facsimile: (561) 241-0812 Primary Email: pdlitlaw@gedlawyers.com Secondary Email:jnewborn@gedlawyers.com /s/ David R. Shaheen SCOTT M. ROSSO, ESQ. Florida Bar No.: 505757 DAVID R. SHAHEEN, ESQ. Florida Bar No.: 0117947