You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

National Continental Insurance Co. v. Perez

Citations: 897 So. 2d 492; 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 86Docket: No. 3D03-1062

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; January 11, 2005; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

National Continental Insurance Company appeals a class certification order involving insured individuals, including Hector Perez, Jr., who assert they were inadequately compensated for losses after the insurer recovered from third parties. The insureds allege that the insurer only reimbursed a prorated portion of their collision deductibles, factoring in their contributory negligence. The case references Monte De Oca v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., which established that an automobile insurer does not violate the made-whole doctrine by returning a correctly calculated prorated deductible to a contributorily negligent insured following a subrogation recovery. Although the trial court acted within its discretion in limiting its ruling to class certification, the legal principles from Monte De Oca apply directly to this case, leading to the conclusion that the order must be reversed. The decision is therefore reversed and remanded.

Legal Issues Addressed

Class Certification in Insurance Disputes

Application: The trial court's decision to certify the class was within its discretion, but the application of precedents required a reversal of the order.

Reasoning: Although the trial court acted within its discretion in limiting its ruling to class certification, the legal principles from Monte De Oca apply directly to this case, leading to the conclusion that the order must be reversed.

Subrogation and the Made-Whole Doctrine

Application: The insurer's actions were consistent with established precedent, as the deduction of a prorated portion of the deductible for contributory negligence does not violate the made-whole doctrine.

Reasoning: The case references Monte De Oca v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., which established that an automobile insurer does not violate the made-whole doctrine by returning a correctly calculated prorated deductible to a contributorily negligent insured following a subrogation recovery.