Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Naomi DESINOR, et al., Appellants, v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee.
Appellants, Naomi Desinor and David A. Joseph (the “Insureds”), appeal a final judgment rendered after the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of appellee, Citizens Property Insurance Corporation. Upon careful de novo review of the record, we determine that the trial court made improper credibility determinations regarding the Insureds’ expert witness’ testimony. See Vega v. Safepoint Ins. Co., 326 So. 3d 176, 181 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (“[Plaintiff's] Expert's conclusions based on his experience and review of the record in combination with [Plaintiff's] deposition testimony ․ were sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact. Thus, summary judgment was inappropriate at this juncture of the proceedings.”); Ortega v. JW Marriott Inv., LLC, 405 So. 3d 473, 477–78 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (“Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of legitimate inferences from the facts are jury functions, not those of a judge, whether he is ruling on a motion for summary judgment or for a directed verdict.” (quoting Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986))).
Further, the record evidence presents sufficient factual dispute to conclude that the Insureds met their burden to show the existence of a triable issue as to the cause of loss, at least as to some of their damages. See Frederick v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 314 So. 3d 539, 540 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (finding conflicting expert affidavits as to cause of loss created sufficient triable issues precluding summary judgment); Garcia v. First Cmty. Ins. Co., 241 So. 3d 254, 257−58 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (holding summary judgment inappropriate where findings of insurer's expert and conclusions of insured's expert were “clearly at odds”); see also Ortega v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 257 So. 3d 1171, 1173 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (finding homeowner's counterevidence sufficient to create disputed issues of material fact). Accordingly, we reverse and remand.
Reversed and remanded.
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 3D23-1926
Decided: September 03, 2025
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)