International's insurer, Landmark American Insurance Company, determined, however, that International's building suffered only $12,984.15 in covered damages, and it did not issue any payment because the policy carried a $65,000 deductible.

Landmark further determined that there was no coverage for the business interruption and extra expense claim based on an applicable policy exclusion.

Several months later, International forwarded correspondence to Landmark demanding appraisal by Stellar.

Landmark moved to disqualify International's public adjuster from acting as its appraiser.

The Landmark Policy

The policy provided:

If we and you disagree on the value of the property or the amount of loss, either may make written demand for an appraisal of the loss. In this event, each party will select a competent and impartial appraiser.

The International/Stellar Agreement

The agreement between International and Stellar provided for International to pay Stellar 10 percent of:

all payments made by the insurance company related to the loss, whether contractual or extra-contractual. In the event appraisal or mediation is demanded or a lawsuit is filed on the above claim, there will be an additional charge of five-percent. The total contractual percentage shall not exceed the maximum allowed by law. The fee will be based on the total amount of the settlement after the application of the deductible. Fees will only be charged on monies paid by the Insurer after the date this Agreement is signed.

The Court's Decision

The court granted Landmark's motion.

In its decision, the court first ruled that the fact that Stellar anticipated a percentage of the appraisal award did not necessarily require disqualification.

The court, however, found that disqualification was appropriate because Stellar could not be considered impartial within the meaning of the Landmark insurance policy given Stellar's contingent fee agreement with Continental.

In the court's view, “[a] pecuniary interest in the outcome” was “by definition a personal interest” that favored one side over the other, and disqualification was appropriate.

The case is Landmark American Ins. Co. v. Richardt, No: 2:18-cv-600-FtM-29UAM (M.D. Fla. June 13, 2019). Attorneys involved include: For Landmark American Insurance Company, Plaintiff, Counter Defendant: Samantha Apoorva Satish, William Roderick Lewis, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP, Tampa, FL. For H. Anton Richardt, DDS, PA, doing business as International Institute For Cosmetic Dentistry, Defendant: Warren Donald Diener, LEAD ATTORNEY, The Diener Firm, P.A., Plantation, FL. For H. Anton Richardt, DDS, PA, Counter Claimant: Warren Donald Diener, LEAD ATTORNEY, The Diener Firm, P.A., Plantation, FL.