Scott Black and Mac Lambert (Florida Keys/Islamorada) (First Party Property) successfully obtained a Defense Verdict in a first party property case against Citizens Property Insurance Corporation where the property had admitted water intrusion after Hurricane Irma. Despite an active roof leak, and mitigation efforts by three separate companies, the jury found Citizens properly denied the claim, rejecting the Plaintiff’s demand for nearly $100,000 in combined roof and interior damages.
The Plaintiff alleged her home sustained wind damage as the result of Hurricane Irma on September 10, 2017, which caused or contributed to multiple roof leaks impacting the interior of her property. She claimed she placed a call to Citizens within days of the Hurricane which went ignored (an assertion without evidentiary support). After performing multiple post storm repairs, she was later represented by a public adjuster who got three additional companies involved on an Assignment of Benefits Agreement (AOB). The claim was officially reported in July 2019 by the mold inspection company who was working in conjunction with the remediation and roofing vendors. All three vendors pursued separate AOB claims, two of which were still pending at the time of trial. Plaintiff elected to use the owner and principal of the mold inspection company as her cause and origin expert. The focus of the defense was establishing that the property had a history of multiple prior roof repairs and leaks before the storm, sustained no wind damage, and suffered from significant wear, tear, and deterioration. The defense had to admit the roof leaked before, during, and after the storm. However, we were successful in convincing the jury that the roof sustained no wind damage that could have been the cause and/or concurrent cause of the roof leaks and ensuing damage.
The Plaintiff’s attempt to link causation through their non-engineer expert/AOB contractor proved unsuccessful. The defense countered with a solid expert engineer opinion that corroborated the findings of Citizens’ initial investigation and coverage denial. Another determining factor was likely the questionable testimony from the insured’s son who attempted to characterize the roof repairs as routine maintenance while denying any prior interior leaks or damage before Irma.
We are currently pursuing a substantial claim for attorneys’ fees and costs in the insured’s case based on an expired proposal for settlement. We will be pursuing summary judgments in the two remaining AOB claims based on the verdict followed by motions to tax the additional fees and costs from corresponding expired proposals.