Lawsuit Filed Over Insurance Dispute
Roger D. Fana and Leticia D. Fana filed a complaint against Citizens Property Insurance Corporation. They brought the case before a Florida circuit court. The dispute involved a property insurance claim. The Plaintiffs sought damages exceeding $30,000. They believed their insurance provider failed to meet its obligations under the policy.
Storm Damage Triggered a Disputed Claim
The Plaintiffs’ home sustained damage on November 9, 2020. At that time, their insurance policy with Citizens was active. They submitted a claim expecting full coverage. However, Citizens paid less than expected. The insurer also failed to properly evaluate the damage. As a result, the Plaintiffs believed their loss was underestimated. This led them to take legal action. They aimed to enforce their policy rights and recover full compensation.
Denied Coverage Created Ongoing Hardship
Without full payment, the Plaintiffs could not afford repairs. They hired a public adjuster to reassess the damage. Legal counsel was necessary to protect their interests. The experience caused stress and uncertainty. They questioned the reliability of their coverage. This disrupted their ability to restore the property.
Plaintiffs Sought Full Compensation and Legal Costs
The Plaintiffs requested funds for repairs and replacements. They also asked for attorney’s fees and court costs. Additionally, they sought both pre- and post-judgment interest. They reserved the right to pursue punitive damages if justified.
Key Arguments and proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiffs: Roger D. Fana | Leticia D. Fana
Counsel for Plaintiffs: David A. Neblett
Expert Witness for Plaintiffs: Alfredo Brizuela
Defendant: Citizens Property Insurance Corporation
Counsel for Defendant: Edward N. Krakauer
Expert Witness for Defendant: Andre E. Slintak
Claims
Count I: Breach of Contract
The Plaintiffs alleged that Citizens Property Insurance Corporation breached their insurance contract. They claimed Citizens failed to fully cover the property damage and did not pay the amounts owed. According to the Plaintiffs, Citizens also failed to properly adjust the loss and delayed payment without justification. As a result, they incurred financial damages due to the alleged breach.
Count II: Fraudulent Inducement
The Plaintiffs asserted that Citizens engaged in fraudulent inducement when issuing the policy. They claimed Citizens made false representations regarding the scope of coverage, suggesting the policy offered broad protection. In practice, however, exclusions significantly limited coverage. The Plaintiffs argued Citizens knowingly made these misstatements. Relying on those representations, they purchased the policy only to find the promised coverage was, in effect, illusory. This caused them financial harm.
Count III: Request for Declaratory Relief
The Plaintiffs asked the court to declare their rights under the insurance policy. They alleged a dispute existed regarding how the policy applied to their loss. Specifically, they argued that Citizens used vague language to avoid coverage. The Plaintiffs requested judicial interpretation of the policy terms and clarification of Citizens’ duty to adjust the loss. They sought a ruling defining the responsibilities of both parties.
Defense
Citizens Property Insurance Corporation denied that the damages claimed by Roger D. Fana and Leticia D. Fana were covered under their homeowners insurance policy. The Defendant insisted it did not breach the contract, stating it properly adjusted the loss and paid all covered amounts. Citizens further denied any violation of Florida statutes regarding claims handling or payment timelines. The company argued the policy excluded coverage for interior water damage unless caused by a wind-created opening from a covered peril, and asserted that no such opening occurred. It also maintained the damage resulted from age, wear and tear, foot traffic, or insufficient maintenance—conditions expressly excluded under the policy.
Citizens rejected the claim of fraudulent inducement, denying it made false or misleading statements about coverage or that the policy language was ambiguous or deceptive. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiffs failed to fulfill all contractual obligations. Regarding declaratory relief, Citizens acknowledged the policy terms but emphasized that those terms carry specific exclusions and conditions. The company denied avoiding payment through ambiguity and argued it acted in accordance with policy provisions. Ultimately, Citizens requested judgment in its favor and argued the Plaintiffs were not entitled to punitive damages.
Jury Verdict
On March 7, 2025, the jury ruled in favor of Plaintiffs Roger D. Fana and Leticia D. Fana against Defendant Citizens Property Insurance Corporation on their property damage insurance claim. The jury awarded $70,149 in compensatory damages for the cost to repair the plaintiffs’ property related to the loss that occurred during the applicable policy period.
The jury found that the plaintiffs’ home sustained physical damage between June 11, 2020, and June 11, 2021, and determined that the Defendant failed to prove the loss was excluded under the policy. As a result, the court entered final judgment in favor of Roger D. Fana and Leticia D. Fana. The Plaintiffs were also entitled to pre- and post-judgment interest at the legal rate, as well as allowable court costs.
