SafePoint Insurance Company v. Riley Ellison, Jr.

Summary

The Third District Court of Appeal of Florida affirmed a final judgment for the insured following a jury verdict concerning water and mold damage under an all-risk insurance policy. The court held that conflicting causation evidence supported the jury’s determination that the damage was caused solely by water and that the trial court properly denied the insurer’s motions for directed verdict and a new trial.

Holdings

1. The trial court properly denied SafePoint's motion for directed verdict because conflicting evidence and different reasonable inferences permitted the jury to determine whether the property damage was caused solely by water or in whole or in part by mold.
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying SafePoint's motion for a new trial because the conflicting causation evidence supported the jury's verdict for Ellison.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court properly denied SafePoint's motion for directed verdict where conflicting evidence supported different reasonable inferences regarding whether mold caused the property damage.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying SafePoint's motion for a new trial after the jury found for Ellison.

Disposition

affirmed