UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
v.
RUBELINA CORNIEL
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A jury verdict awarding damages for insurance underpayment is supported by substantial competent evidence when the insured's testimony supports the award, and an appellate court may not reweigh evidence on appeal from a directed verdict motion.
[1] On appeal from a directed verdict motion, a jury verdict for damages is supported by substantial competent evidence if the verdict is supported by any competent evidence,…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The factfinder was free to accept Corniel's testimony. We decline as we must Universal's invitation to reweigh the evidence.”
Court's explanation for affirming the jury verdict despite Universal's argument about cross-examination testimony
Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company denied or underpaid a covered loss claim by insured Rubelina Corniel. A jury found Universal had under…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict (J.N.O.V.) cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed May 27, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D24-2242
Lower Tribunal No. 20-17511-CA-01
Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company,
Appellant,
vs.
Rubelina Corniel,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Migna Sanchez-Llorens, Judge.
Russo Lima Appellate Firm, P.A., and Elizabeth K. Russo, for appellant.
Law Office of Lazaro Vazquez, P.A., and Lazaro Vazquez, for appellee.
Before SCALES, C.J., and LINDSEY and BOKOR, JJ.
SCALES, C.J.
In this first-party insurance case, appellant Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company (“Universal") appeals an April 9, 2025 amended final judgment entered against it after a jury found that Universal had underpaid its insured, appellee Rubelina Corniel, for a covered loss. Specifically, Universal argues that the trial court erred in denying Universal's motion for judgment in accordance with its prior motion for a directed verdict because the evidence adduced at trial purportedly does not support $4,093.18 of the $32,000 the jury awarded in the verdict.1 We disagree.
"A trial court's ruling on a motion for judgment in accordance with a prior motion for directed verdict is ... reviewed de novo." Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Barbanell, 100 So. 3d 152, 157 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). In employing our standard of review, this Court reviews “the jury's award of damages to see if it is supported by substantial competent evidence viewing the facts and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the verdict.” Alvarez v. All Star Boxing, Inc., 258 So. 3d 508, 512 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018); see also Forbes v. Millionaire Gallery, Inc., 335 So. 3d 1260, 1262 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) ("When deciding the appropriateness of a directed verdict or JNOV, Florida
trial and appellate courts use the test of whether the verdict is, for JNOVs, or would be, for directed verdicts, supported by competent, substantial evidence." (quoting Siegel v. Cross Senior Care, Inc., 239 So. 3d 738, 743 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018))).
Universal urges us to focus not on Corniel's unequivocal testimony supporting the jury's verdict, but on the testimony elicited by Universal's cross-examination of Corniel's contractor. The factfinder was free to accept Corniel's testimony. We decline as we must Universal's invitation to reweigh the evidence. See Acosta v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 421 So. 3d 716, 720 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025). Our standard of review compels us to affirm the jury's verdict and, therefore, also the challenged amended final judgment. Id.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Barbanell, 100 So. 3d 152 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)
- Alvarez v. ALL Star Boxing, Inc., 258 So. 3d 508 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
- Siegel v. Cross Senior Care, Inc., 239 So. 3d 738 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
- Forbes v. Millionaire Gallery, Inc., 335 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)