July 2018

Introducing: Stefan K. Williamson

Originally a native of Jamaica, Stefan has spent the latter half of his life in South Florida. Though, he has been litigating cases from the panhandle down to Key West his entire career. Stefan appreciates the different perspectives and variables at play, enabling him to fine-tune an approach catered to his clients’ needs.

Prior to joining the Mineo Salcedo Law Firm, Stefan practiced with several regional law firms representing large financial institutions, insurance companies and other businesses in State and Federal courts. With the knowledge and insight gained working for institutional clients, Stefan now devotes his practice to protecting the rights of policyholders and service providers in underpaid or denied claims, as well as other general civil litigation matters.

Stefan earned his Bachelor’s Degree in Finance, summa cum laude, from Florida Atlantic University. He then obtained his Juris Doctor Degree from Florida International University College of Law, receiving high regards in legal research and writing. While in law school, Stefan devoted hundreds of hours through Legal Aid Service of Broward County, Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, Feeding South Florida, and HandsOn Broward, amongst others; an investment in the community he continues to date.

Stefan is licensed to practice law in all Florida State courts, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida.

In his off time, you may find Stefan exploring South Florida with his family, mountain biking, or tackling another home project.

Introducing: Stefan K. Williamson

Originally a native of Jamaica, Stefan has spent the latter half of his life in South Florida. Though, he has been litigating cases from the panhandle down to Key West his entire career. Stefan appreciates the different perspectives and variables at play, enabling him to fine-tune an approach catered to his clients’ needs.

Prior to joining the Mineo Salcedo Law Firm, Stefan practiced with several regional law firms representing large financial institutions, insurance companies and other businesses in State and Federal courts. With the knowledge and insight gained working for institutional clients, Stefan now devotes his practice to protecting the rights of policyholders and service providers in underpaid or denied claims, as well as other general civil litigation matters.

Stefan earned his Bachelor’s Degree in Finance, summa cum laude, from Florida Atlantic University. He then obtained his Juris Doctor Degree from Florida International University College of Law, receiving high regards in legal research and writing. While in law school, Stefan devoted hundreds of hours through Legal Aid Service of Broward County, Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, Feeding South Florida, and HandsOn Broward, amongst others; an investment in the community he continues to date.

Stefan is licensed to practice law in all Florida State courts, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida.

In his off time, you may find Stefan exploring South Florida with his family, mountain biking, or tackling another home project.

Citizens v Mendoza

On July 5, 2018 the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a judgment entered at trial in favor of the insureds, Risbel Mendoza and Vicente Jubes. The case involved a homeowner’s claim for water damages resulting from a water heater leak. The insurance company, Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, denied the claim, asserting that the damage fell under the policy’s constant or repeated seepage or leakage exclusion.

According to the policy:

Constant or repeated seepage or leakage of water or steam, or the presence or condensation of humidity, moisture or vapor; which occurs over a period of time, whether hidden or not and results in damage such as wet or dry rot, “fungi,” deterioration, rust, decay or other corrosion.

At the trial, the attorney for the homeowners argued that Citizens picked the wrong exclusion to deny the claim and that it should have picked a “more specific” exclusion over the “more general” exclusion, and therefore the insurance company violated its duty to adjust.

Additionally, the insureds complained about how the adjuster from Citizens denied the claim, asserting that it was a “violation of the ethical responsibilities. It is a violation of the ethical – of the adjuster’s law. It is a violation of the contract itself where it says, we will adjust all losses.”

The jury found that Citizens did not properly exclude the claim from coverage and awarded the homeowners $22,000 in damages.

The appellate court reversed, finding that the jury instructions focused on whether the adjuster properly investigated or properly adjusted the claim and whether Citizens violated a code of ethics. While such considerations may be appropriate in a bad faith case, they have no place in a simple breach of contract action. See Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Calonge, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D855b (Fla. 3d DCA Apr. 18, 2018). The homeowners were free to criticize Citizens’ adjuster’s conclusions without arguing that he breached a duty or obligation to them.

Download Citizens v. Mendoza (duty to adjust) PDF