An appellate court in Florida, reversing a trial court's decision, has ruled that an insured's public adjuster may not later become the insured's "disinterested appraiser" within the meaning of an insurance policy's appraisal clause.
The Case
Joseph Valenti, Jr., asserted that after a leak in his home caused water damage, he signed an agreement with a public adjuster. As part of the agreement, Mr. Valenti assigned 20 percent of any recovery from his insurance company, State Farm Florida Insurance Company, to the public adjuster.
After Mr. Valenti retained the adjuster, the adjuster contacted State Farm about the claim, attended the property inspection, and sent follow-up correspondence about the inspection to State Farm. Ultimately, State Farm sent payment for its valuation of the loss and demanded appraisal to resolve any remaining dispute about the valuation.
In response, the adjuster sent a letter to State Farm naming himself as Mr. Valenti's appraiser. State Farm objected, arguing that the appointment of the adjuster violated the policy's requirement that the parties select a "qualified, disinterested appraiser."
Mr. Valenti disagreed, and went to court.
The trial court entered summary judgment in Mr. Valenti's favor, finding, as a matter of law that, his adjuster could be his "disinterested" appraiser.
State Farm appealed.
The Appellate Court's Decision
The appellate court reversed.
In its decision, the appellate court specifically refused State Farm's request that it conclude, as a matter of law, that an insured's public adjuster could not later be appointed the insured's disinterested appraiser where there was a contingency-fee arrangement. Rather, the appellate court said, it could resolve the issue on "narrower" grounds: the actions of Mr. Valenti's appraiser combined with his financial interest.
The appellate court explained that Mr. Valenti had signed a contract with the adjuster entitling the adjuster to a portion of any recovery from State Farm and assigning a portion of his claim to the adjuster; the adjuster had inspected the property and submitted the claim to State Farm; and the adjuster had subsequently sent a letter appointing himself the appraiser.
On the facts of this case, the appellate court held, the adjuster was not "disinterested" and it reversed the trial court's judgment. On remand, it said, the trial court should enter judgment for State Farm on the issue of this specific adjuster's ability to serve as the disinterested appraiser for this insured.
The case is State Farm Florida Ins. Co. v. Valenti, No. 4D19-205 (Fla. Ct. App. Dec. 11, 2019). Attorneys involved include: Kara Berard Rockenbach, David A. Noel, and Daniel M. Schwarz of Link & Rockenbach, PA, West Palm Beach, for appellant. Matthew G. Struble and Christine D. Skubala of Struble, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.
Steven A. Meyerowitz
Steven A. Meyerowitz, a Harvard Law School graduate, is the founder and president of Meyerowitz Communications Inc., a law firm marketing communications consulting company. He may be contacted at [email protected].