Appellate Court in Miami Establishes Precedent—Insured’s Sworn Statement Can Win Insurance Coverage Disputes

CSK Appellate Team
Fort Lauderdale West Associate Amanda Wasserman
Fort Lauderdale West Partner Michael Rosenberg, Board Certified in Appellate Law

Case Summary
The Third District Court of Appeal in Miami recently affirmed a major win for an insurance company (Defendant) in a coverage dispute with a medical provider (Plaintiff). The case centered on whether the insured had misrepresented their address on an auto insurance application—a detail that would affect coverage and premiums.

The Defendant relied on the insured’s Examination Under Oath (EUO), a sworn statement taken as part of the insurance investigation. In the EUO, the insured admitted that the address listed on the policy application was not current. This admission became the cornerstone of the Defendant’s strategy, as it provided direct evidence of a material misrepresentation.

Appellate Strategy
The CSK Appellate Team built their appellate argument around the insured’s EUO, arguing that, under Florida’s summary judgment rules, out-of-court statements like an EUO are valid evidence if they could be presented in admissible form at trial. The Defendant also submitted the insurance policy, application, affidavits from company staff, a letter disclaiming coverage, a Notice of Rescission, returned premium checks, and a response to the Plaintiff’s demand letter.

The Plaintiff challenged the admissibility of the EUO, claiming it was hearsay and that procedural requirements had not been met. However, the court agreed with the Defendant: the EUO was proper summary judgment evidence because the insured could testify directly at trial, making the statement admissible.

Decision
Both the trial court and the appellate court found no genuine issue of material fact—the insured had made a material misrepresentation about where the vehicle was garaged. The Plaintiff failed to present any evidence to counter the insured’s sworn admission. As a result, the court affirmed summary judgment for the Defendant, confirming the insurance company’s right to deny coverage.

This decision sets a clear precedent in Florida: an insured’s sworn statement in an EUO can be used as summary judgment evidence to support an insurance company’s defense, as long as it could be presented in an admissible form at trial. The ruling strengthens the position of insurers in coverage disputes and clarifies the rules for admissible evidence in summary judgment proceedings.