After the insureds' home was damaged by Hurricane Wilma, they filed a claim for reimbursement. Sunshine paid the claim and closed the file. See Sunshine State Ins. Co. v. Corridori, No. 4D09-2502, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 915 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.Feb. 3, 2010). Two years later, the insureds submitted a "supplemental" claim for damage discovered by a public auditor. Sunshine required a sworn proof of loss to be submitted within 90 days and examinations under oath. The insureds did not comply with the deadlines, and their late submission was incomplete and inaccurate. Consequently, Sunshine denied the new claims, concluding that the damages were not "supplemental" to the original damages and that the insureds had breached the policy by failing to comply with the proof of loss requirements.
The insureds the sued to compel an appraisal. Without taking any evidence, the trial court concluded the new claim was supplemental and that the insureds had not breached the policy. An appraisal was ordered.
The appellate court reversed. Only after a court established that the losses were covered by a policy could the losses be appraised. The parties disputed whether the claimed losses were covered by the policy and whether the insureds complied with the policy requirements. The trial court, without taking any evidence, did not resolve the factual issues to support its determination of coverage. Therefore, the case was remanded for further proceedings.
