In Goheagan, the Fourth District Court of Appeal examined a bad faith claim alleging that an insurer had failed to protect its insured from an excess judgment by not making a timely offer of settlement to the party injured by the insured. The insurer defended on the basis that, during the relevant time, the injured party was in a coma, and despite many attempts to obtain essential information to make an offer of settlement, the injured party’s family would not provide the injured party’s attorney’s name or the information necessary to make the offer of settlement. Consequently it was unclear to whom the insurer should make an offer of settlement.
The trial court granted summary judgment to the insurer. On appeal, the Florida Justice Reform Institute appeared as amicus curiae in support of the insurer, arguing that these facts do not give rise to bad faith given the challenging circumstances the insurer faced and the insurer’s formidable efforts to make a timely offer of settlement. In spite of these efforts, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that there was a disputed issue of fact regarding whether the insurer committed bad faith, precluding summary judgment.
FJRI represented by George N. Meros, Jr. and Andy V. Bardos of GrayRobinson, P.A.