FLA. FARM BUREAU CASUALTY v. EUGENE COX, et al.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA FARM BUREAU CASUALTY INSURANCE CO., Appellant, v. CASE NO. 1D05-4111 EUGENE A. COX and DEBRA COX, Appellees. ___________________________/ Opinion filed December 15, 2006. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County. R. V. Swanson, Judge. Mark J. Upton, Esquire of Daniell, Upton, Perry & Morris, P.C., Daphne, AL, Elliot H. Scherker, Esquire, Elliot B. Kula, Esquire, of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., for Appellant. Gregory M. Shoemaker, Esquire of Schofield, Wade, Roane & Shoemaker, P.A., Pensacola and Louis K. Rosenbloum, Esquire of Louis K. Rosenbloum, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellees. Charles F. Beall, Jr., Esquire of Moore, Hill & Westmoreland, P.A., Pensacola, for Amicus Curiae Helping Hands Legal Center. ON APPELLANT S MOTION FOR REHEARING, MOTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC, AND/OR MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION PER CURIAM. Appellant s motion is granted to the extent that we certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court as a question of great public importance: DOES SECTION 627.702(1), FLORIDA STATUTES (2004), REFERRED TO AS THE VALUED POLICY LAW, REQUIRE AN INSURANCE CARRIER TO PAY THE FACE AMOUNT OF THE POLICY TO AN OWNER OF A BUILDING DEEMED A TOTAL LOSS WHEN THE BUILDING IS DAMAGED IN PART BY A COVERED PERIL BUT IS SIGNIFICANTLY DAMAGED BY AN EXCLUDED PERIL? The motion is otherwise denied. BENTON, POLSTON, and THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.