Citizens Property Insurance Corporation v. Stieben

BY ORDER OF THE COURT. Upon consideration of the motion for clarification of July' 6, 2016, decision filed by Appellees on July 18,2016, IT IS ORDERED that the motion is granted. Accordingly, the opinion dated July 6, 2016, is withdrawn, and the attached opinion is substituted therefor. No further motions will be entertained. SILBERMAN, Judge. Citizens Property Insurance Corporation seeks review of a final judgment awarding the insureds, James and Jessica Stieben, $233,610.02 in damages for breach of-a homeowner’s insurance policy. The cause of action arose after the parties disagreed as to the appropriate method of repairing sinkhole damage. We affirm the final judgment in all respects save for the award of money damages. We reverse to the extent that the trial court entered judgment for damages payable directly to the Stiebens without regard to the policy’s loss settlement provision. See Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Blaha, 194 So.3d 411, 417 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016); Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Amat, 198 So.3d 730, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D448, D450, 2016 WL 670189 (Fla. 2d DCA Feb. 19, 2016); Tower Hill Select Ins. Co. v. McKee, 151 So.3d 2, 4 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014), review denied, 163 So.3d 511 (Fla.2015). Under this provision, Citizens only has the obligation to pay for repairs as the work is performed *216 under a subsurface repair contract. Blaha, 194 So.3d at 413, 41 Fla. L. Weekly at D887; Amat, 198 So.3d at 732, 41 Fla. L. Weekly at D450. The Stiebens are entitled to an enforceable money judgment in their favor for damages other than subsurface repairs, as conceded by Citizens, as well as a judgment for the subsurface repairs reflecting that Citizens is obligated to pay for repairs as the work is performed pursuant to a subsurface repair contract. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. WALLACE and BLACK, JJ., Concur.