KALLER v. UNIVERSAL PROPERTY CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY (2026)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Alexander KALLER, et al., Appellants, v. UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 3D24-2294

Decided: July 30, 2026

Before LOGUE, MILLER, and GOODEN, JJ.

Mintz Truppman, P.A., and Timothy H. Crutchfield, for appellants. Russo Lima Appellate Firm, P.A., and Elizabeth K. Russo and Paulo R. Lima, for appellee.

Affirmed. See Marriott Int'l, Inc. v. Am. Bridge Bahamas, Ltd., 193 So. 3d 902, 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (explaining that when reviewing an order on a motion for directed verdict, “[a]ppellate courts are required to evaluate the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and abstain from reweighing any conflicting or ambiguous evidence presented below”); Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Eghbal, 54 So. 3d 525, 526 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (“If there is conflicting evidence or if different reasonable inferences may be drawn from the evidence, then the issue is factual and should be submitted to the jury for resolution.”).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network