Jury’s Verdict for Loss Caused by Collapse Overturned
The Florida Court of Appeal overturned the jury’s verdict findng loss caused by collapse. Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Caboverde, 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 4474 (Fla. Ct. App. June 28, 2023).
The insured homeowners had two claims. One was a 2016 ceiling collapse; the second was loss caused by Hurricane Irma in 2019. The homeowners’ policy covered collapse defined as “an abrupt falling down or caving in of a building or any part of a building with the result that the building . . . cannot be occupied for its intended purpose.” Collapse had to be caused by, among other things, decay or insect damage that was hidden from view.
At trial, the insureds’ pre-purchase home inspector testified that no wood destroying organisms were found. Further, the roof was five to seven years old and in “really good” condition. Nevertheless, in September 2016, seven months after the homeowners had moved into the house, the living room ceiling collpased by two or three inches. The homeowners were no longer able to ocupy the living room area because of the risk.
While the insureds’ contractor testified he found termite damage, on cross-examination he admitted he was not a termite expert and he could not opine on how long the termites were in the home, or the rate at which termites could cause damage. The insurer’s field admuster revealed that the home’s interior walls and ceiling were all standing. The ceiling contained cracks, but no pieces of the wall or ceiling were laying on the ground.
At the close of the evidence, the insurer moved for a directed verdict on the ceiling collpase claim. The motion was denied and the the jury found there was a collapse caused by decay or termite damage. The insurer moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which was also denied.The circuit court entered a final judgment in the homeowners’ favor.
The Court of Appeals reversed. The circuit court judge should have granted the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict because the homeowners had not presented evidence that unknown or hidden decay or termite damage had caused the alleged ceiling collapse. The homeowners never presented any evidence that hidden and unknown decay or insect damage had been present in the home in September 2016. The only witness who testifed about termite damage was the homeowners’ contractor, who did not inspect the home until June 2021, almost five years after the alleged ceiling collapse. Further, the contractor expert admitted he was not a termite expert and he did not know how long the termites had been present.
Therefore, the insurer was entilted to final judgment in accordance with its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The circuit court’s final judgment was reversed. The circuit court’s final judgment in the homeowners’ favor on their 2019 Hurricna Irm cliam was affirmed, however.
