Home > Legal Library > Abstract




Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected


Nunez v. Geico General Insurance Co.



by Carlos D. Cabrera
Conroy, Simberg, Ganon, Krevans, Abel, Lurvey, Morrow & Schefer, P.A. - Hollywood Office

Hinda Klein
Conroy, Simberg, Ganon, Krevans, Abel, Lurvey, Morrow & Schefer, P.A. - Hollywood Office

Diane H. Tutt
Conroy, Simberg, Ganon, Krevans, Abel, Lurvey, Morrow & Schefer, P.A. - Hollywood Office

July 4, 2013

Previously published on June 27, 2013

Today, in a 5 to 2 decision, the Florida Supreme Court issued its opinion in Nunez v. Geico General Ins. Co., Case No. SC12-650 (Fla., June 27, 2013), a case which was argued before the Court on December 4, 2012. This case was certified by the federal Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, on the following certified question: “[w]hether, under FLA. STAT. § 627.736, an insurer can require an insured to attend an [examination under oath] as a condition precedent to recovery of [personal injury protection] benefits?” The Florida Supreme Court answered this question in the negative.


 

The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.
 

View More Library Documents By...

 
Conroy, Simberg, Ganon, Krevans, Abel, Lurvey, Morrow & Schefer, P.A.
 
Hollywood Office
Hollywood Office
Hollywood Office
Practice Area
 
Insurance
 
Conroy, Simberg, Ganon, Krevans, Abel, Lurvey, Morrow & Schefer, P.A. Overview