Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
William Adams and Dorothy Adams, His Wife, and Thomasshelton and Elizabeth Shelton, His Wife,plaintiffs-appellants, v. the Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York, Defendant-appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. - 955 F.2d 39
March 6, 1992
James B. Tilghman, Stewart, Tilghman, Fox & Bianchi, Miami, Fla., for plaintiffs-appellants.
Love Phipps, Corlett, Killian, Ober & Levi, Miami, Fla., for defendant-appellee.
Prior report: 757 F.Supp. 1348.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida; Eugene P. Spellman, Judge.
Before FAY and COX, Circuit Judges.*
PER CURIAM:
In Adams v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 920 F.2d 897 (11th Cir.1991), we certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court:
Assuming that Fla.Stat. Section 624.155(1)(b)1. provides for a first-party bad faith claim in an uninsured motorist case, and assuming that damages exceeding the limits of the insurance policy may be collected against an uninsured motorist carrier, can the measure of damages properly include an award of punitive damages against the insurer?
Id. at 900. The Florida Supreme Court recently responded to this question in Adams v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 591 So.2d 929 (Fla.1992). The Florida Supreme Court referred to its recent decision in McLeod v. Continental Insurance Co., 591 So.2d 621 (Fla.1992), as determinative of this case. In McLeod, the court held that the proper measure of damages in first-party actions under section 624.155 "are those amounts which are the natural, proximate, probable, or direct consequence of the insurer's bad faith actions," and rejected "the contention that first-party bad faith damages should be fixed at the amount of the excess judgment." 591 So.2d at 626.
In the case at bar, the district court did not have the benefit of McLeod or the Florida Supreme Court's answer to the certified question posed by this court in this case. Accordingly, we VACATE the judgment of the district court, and REMAND for reconsideration in light of the Florida Supreme Court's decisions in McLeod and Adams.