STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTO INS CO
v.
NEW HORIZON MEDICAL&DIAGNOSTIC CNT CORP

11th Cir. Ct. App. Div. | 2014-04-03
No. 2012-000467-AP-01
1 FLCA 3406 Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court, Appellate Division (2014)

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.

Synopsis

State Farm appealed an order compelling production of adjuster's notes from an insurance claim file. The appellate court quashed the trial court's order based on Third District precedent establishing that notes in claims files are protected from disclosure.


Holding

Adjuster's notes in claims files are prohibited from disclosure and cannot be compelled for production. The trial court's order compelling such production must be quashed.


Headnotes

[1] Adjuster's notes in an insurance claims file are prohibited from disclosure.

[2] An in camera inspection is a proper method for a trial court to determine the nature of documents subject to privilege.

Previewing 2 of 3 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

Key Quotes

“notes in the claims file" are prohibited from disclosure”

States the controlling legal principle that adjuster's notes in insurance claims files cannot be disclosed, citing Third District precedent in Castle Key Ins. Co. v. Benitez

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

State Farm sought to challenge a trial court order requiring production of certain documents related to an insurance claim. The trial court conducted …

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.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM

As in the very similar ease of State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. C0. v. Menendez (12- 436 AP), which we are deciding concurrently with this one, the trial court is to be commended for conducting an in camera inspection in order to determine the nature of TITO _ T ' T iii; .15;?....i;.¢.;S‘;.;;gi.I £0 I5;produced,‘ 51iEI'w1i=£h¢{iii¢§were subiect to the ;...n_;.;e.;¢r I " privilege, prior to ruling upon the production issue; but based upon the Third District [*2] ‘ h I‘ i Ii I Court of Appcal’s recent opinion stating that “notes in the claims file” are prohibited from disclosure, we must quash the order below which compelled the production of adjustor’s notes.‘ See Castle Key Ins. Co. v. Benitez, 124 So. 3d 379, 380 n.l (Fla. 3d non 2013). ‘ BAGLEY, ARECBS and LINDSEY, JJ., concur. i_ l ,s .1 it It | I l E‘O I I ; l ' As, in the Menendez case, we reviewed the documents ordered to be produced in the instant case, which were filed under seal, and we agree with the trial court's determination that they are “Adjusters Notes.” - _ 2*; 1 . _ [*3] —1£l—’i4 14:88 FRElll- 7-020 PE1004f0ll06 t-U91 " t. 1 E '

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

'

IN AND FOR

DA -‘Fr . ‘ "

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORI

APPELLA'I‘E_ DIVISION. clarification, or certification \F l filed motion for reltearing, ' Ntit Final"Until disposition oftime y /7 CASE NO.: 13-322 AP , _ _ * LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 13-011247-SP 05 -

GABRIELLA FRITI-I

Appellar1t(s) - A » t vs.

RONALD FRITH

Appellee(s) \ . I t " ;j-'5 Florida, Judge GLAIIYS PEREZ. ‘ A31 Appeal from the County Court.for Miami-Dada County, Gmm‘Iz1EL1,A Farr]-I, PRO sis, for appelIant(s). RONA'i.D FRITH, PRO SE, and SCOTT RVVILLINGER, , for appe1lee(s). NORMA S LINDSEY, JJ- (panel) Beforcj:IJERALD BAGLEY, BARBARAARECES, and _-P2Ik- PER C-‘URJAM. xm ..._ ~ 521;? ..-_~ . f'“‘ If ’r§Z l‘5§-."§r'.> [] Dtzihied. [Q Afiirrned. _ '..~; r~.LE)§‘._l_ fr] " Fang C3’ t “'1 I ,»...o14. _<_,3fim Q; ~. : is 2" "IQ e _‘ day of , . ~ - £910 "E ~/ ‘$1153’: :: " ‘-'55 /~ ' . e’( ~ ;-n~__g§a: 9; -".~;’Y'.g' _ _,_ e s \--‘ . -"vi" J

LD BAGLEY

* * * * *

INDSEY

RONALD mum, PRO st: cc:

IERABIUELLA FRITH, PRO SE

13603 Nw 7’I‘H AVENUE 1053 BLOSSOM DR SEBASTIAN, FL 32958 ginmmr, FL 33136 ' ‘ scorr RWILLINGER, ESQ. 801 NW 151 STREET, STE 307 ____._ __.______...___MIAMI.LéLE§tEI1.3JiQ14~-._ .__.__. -_._.._ ,, PCA.al't'iri;i,cdIdenicd rev. 2/24/201


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw