This week, Michael Cassel presented at the Windstorm Insurance Network ("WIND") 2021 Virtual Conference.
0 Comments
Michael Cassel presented to the Florida Association of Public Insurance Adjusters ("FAPIA") 2020 Conference held virtually.
Last week, Michael Cassel presented in the 2020 Civil Remedies Webinar with the Florida Justice Association.
Michael Cassel has been named one of South Florida Business Journal's 40 Under 40 for 2020.
Hillary Cassel and Michael Cassel have both been named as 2020 Rising Stars by Super Lawyers Magazine. This marks the fourth consecutive year for Michael and sixth consecutive year for Hillary.
On May 13, 2020, the Third District Court of Appeal released their decision in Security First Insurance Company v. John Czelusniak (hereinafter “Czelusniak”).[1] The Czelusniak opinion discusses the application of the doctrine of anti-concurrent causation (hereinafter “ACC”) as it relates to exclusionary provisions in insurance policies.
Cassel & Cassel, P.A., were recently retained by the Signature Grand, a Broward staple, to represent them in their claim for loss of business interruption. Click below to read the full complaint and check back for more updates on this unprecedented case. ![]()
On March 28, 2020, Hillary Cassel appeared on Law Talk Live, a weekly radio show hosted by Meldon Law. Mrs. Cassel discussed the implications of insurance coverage for business interruption as it relates to the ongoing pandemic that is Covid-19. Please click here to listen to the complete show.
As many of you know, on October 23, 2019, the Third District Court of Appeal released their opinion in Glendys Vazquez v. Citizens Property Insurance Corporation (hereinafter "Vazquez").[1] This opinion contained some drastic and far reaching implications with regards to the application of Section 626.9744, Florida Statutes,[2] more colloquially referred to as the “Matching Statute,” as it relates to calculations of payment for replacement cost value versus actual cash value on claims.
On April 24, 2019, we posted about the Third District Court of Appeal decision in Jose Alvarez and Hilda Alvarez v. State Farm Florida Insurance Company ("Alvarez").[1] Since then, we have seen, for lack of a better term in today’s climate, an epidemic of reliance on this case where insurance carriers and their counsel utilize it for the proposition that an overinflated estimate is de facto fraud/material misrepresentation. Let me make this perfectly clear: Alvarez stands for nothing of the sort.
|
Attorney BlogCategories
All
Archives
February 2021
|