UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. MARIA GURREONERO and JOSE GURREONERO ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •        DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
    FOURTH DISTRICT
    UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
    Appellant,
    v.
    MARIA GURREONERO and JOSE GURREONERO,
    Appellees.
    No. 4D22-1378
    [August 31, 2022]
    Appeal of nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth
    Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Jeffrey R. Levenson, Judge; L.T. Case
    No. CACE-20-010803.
    Elizabeth K. Russo of Russo Appellate Firm, P.A., Miami, for appellant.
    John S. Bernstein of Bernstein ǀ Polsky, P.A., Boca Raton, for appellees.
    ON CONFESSION OF ERROR
    CONNER, J.
    Appellant, Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company
    (“Universal”), appeals the trial court’s order enforcing a judicially revised
    proposal for settlement (“PFS”) between it and Appellees, Maria and Jose
    Gurreonero (“Insureds”).       Insureds concede error.       We agree with
    Universal, and accept Insureds’ confession of error, that the trial court
    erred when it judicially altered Universal’s original PFS without Universal’s
    consent, permitted Insureds to accept the judicially altered PFS after the
    time to accept the original PFS had expired, and then ordered Universal to
    comply with the judicially altered PFS. See P & O Ports Fla., Inc. v. Cont’l
    Stevedoring & Terminals, Inc., 
    904 So. 2d 507
    , 510 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
    (“[O]nce the trial court concluded that the parties could not change the
    provisions in the non-compete clause as a condition of the offer, it was
    error to strike the improper condition and to allow Continental to accept
    the judicially altered offer. We conclude that Continental was not free to
    accept the offer as modified by the court and P & O was not legally bound
    by its offer which had been materially altered by the court. Once the court
    changed the terms, there was no offer, as P & O clearly did not intend to
    make the monetary offer without the elimination of the non-compete
    provision.”) (internal citations omitted). Accordingly, we reverse and
    remand with instructions directing the trial court to: (1) strike paragraph
    three of its March 11, 2022 order, altering Universal’s original PFS; (2)
    vacate its May 16, 2022 enforcement order; and (3) conduct further
    proceedings consistent with this opinion.
    Reversed and remanded with instructions.
    GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
    *         *        *
    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-1378

Filed Date: 8/31/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/31/2022