Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed March 15, 2023.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-1844
Lower Tribunal No. 16-9950
________________
Adalberto Vega,
Appellant,
vs.
Citizens Property Insurance Corporation,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Charles K.
Johnson, Judge.
Perry & Neblett, P.A., David Avellar Neblett and John A. Wynn, for
appellant.
Paul R. Pearcy, P.A., and Maureen G. Pearcy, for appellee.
Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and HENDON and GORDO, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Volusia Cnty. v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P.,
760
So. 2d 126, 130 (Fla. 2000) (“Summary judgment is proper if there is no
genuine issue of material fact and if the moving party is entitled to a judgment
as a matter of law.”); In re Amends. to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510,
317 So. 3d 72,
78 (Fla. 2021) (“Any pending rehearing of a summary judgment motion
decided under the pre-amendment rule should be decided under the pre-
amendment rule, subject of course to a party’s ability to file a renewed motion
for summary judgment under the new rule.”); Gov’t Emps. Ins. Co. v.
Macedo,
228 So. 3d 1111, 1113 (Fla. 2017) (“Insurance policy construction
is a question of law subject to de novo review.”) (citing Wash. Nat’l Ins. Corp.
v. Ruderman,
117 So. 3d 943, 948 (Fla. 2013)); Penzer v. Transp. Ins. Co.,
29 So. 3d 1000, 1005 (Fla. 2010) (“[A] question of insurance policy
interpretation, which is a question of law, [is also] subject to de novo
review.”); E. Florida Hauling, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co.,
913 So. 2d 673, 676
(Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (“When the language of an insurance policy is clear and
unambiguous, a court must interpret it according to its plain meaning, giving
effect to the policy as it was written.”); Arguelles v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp.,
278 So. 3d 108, 111 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“Finally, we review a denial of a
motion for rehearing under an abuse of discretion standard.”).
2
