Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company v. Scott Liberatore and Cathy Knoblock

Summary

The Sixth District Court of Appeal of Florida affirmed a final judgment in favor of the insureds in a first-party property insurance dispute involving damage from a plumbing leak. The court held that the insurer failed to preserve its arguments concerning the jury instruction on structural fill and found no fundamental error. The court dismissed the insureds’ conditional cross-appeal regarding replacement cost value because the final judgment was affirmed.

Holdings

1. Universal failed to preserve the argument because it never objected to the trial court's consideration of the issue at that stage, never argued that the jury instruction amounted to an unnoticed summary judgment, and did not object even after the trial court characterized the ruling as akin to summary judgment.
2. Universal failed to preserve its factual-dispute argument because it did not object or correct the trial court when the court asked whether the issue was factual or legal, and Universal remained silent while the insureds characterized it as a legal issue.
3. The trial court's ruling did not constitute fundamental error.
4. The insureds' cross-appeal was dismissed because the insureds expressly conditioned it on reversal of the final judgment, and the final judgment was affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Universal preserved its argument that the trial court's ruling concerning structural fill amounted to an unnoticed mid-trial summary judgment.
2. Whether Universal preserved its argument that the nature of structural fill was a factual issue for the jury rather than a legal issue for the trial court.
3. Whether the trial court's jury-instruction ruling constituted fundamental error despite Universal's failure to object.
4. Whether the insureds' conditional cross-appeal concerning replacement-cost value remained viable after affirmance of the final judgment.

Disposition

affirmed