TORTS: MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE; CIVIL PROCEDURE: DISCOVERY: SANCTIONS: PERJURY; INSURANCE: INSURED’S FALSE DEPOSITION TESTIMONY IN PERSONAL INJURY CASE DID NOT TRIGGER FRAUD PROVISION UNDER LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICY BECAUSE THE TESTIMONY DID NOT RELATE TO THE INSURANCE COVERAGE: COURT DOES NOT DECIDE WHETHER EXCLUSION, IF APPLICABLE, WOULD PROVIDE COVERAGE DEFENSE (REQUIRING COMPLIANCE WITH CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION STATUTE) OR DEFENSE OF NO COVERAGE (TO WHICH CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION STATUTE WAS INAPPLICABLE): INSURED COULD CONDITION ACCEPTANCE OF REPLACEMENT INSURANCE DEFENSE COUNSEL ON WITHDRAWAL OF INSURER’S RESERVATION OF RIGHTS: INSURED DID NOT OWE DUTY TO COOPERATE AFTER INSURER ISSUED RESERVATION OF RIGHTS: INSURED COULD DISMISS APPEAL FROM SANCTIONS JUDGMENT AFTER ASSUMING CONTROL OF ITS DEFENSE: SANCTIONS WERE COVERED AS COSTS UNDER THE SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS PROVISION OF POLICY: PUBLIC POLICY DID NOT BAR COVERAGE FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST INSURED

 GEICO General Insurance Company v. Rodriguez, ___ So. 3d ___, 39 Fla. L. Weekly D1937 (Fla. 3d DCA September 10, 2014)

During his deposition in a motor vehicle negligence case, the defendant denied having visual impairments although he was legally blind.  As a result, the trial court imposed monetary sanctions against the defendant.  After the motion for sanctions was filed, … Click To Read Full Case Law Review...