Roberto Jurado v. Direct General Insurance Company

Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed November 26, 2025.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D24-2148
Lower Tribunal No. 22-9368-CA-01
________________
Roberto Jurado ,
Appellant,
vs.
Direct General Insurance Company ,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Vivianne del
Rio, Judge.
George David, P.A., and Christian Carrazana, for appellant.
McFarlane 	Law, 	and 	William 	J. 	McFarlane, 	III, 	and 	Michael 	K.
Mittelmark (Coral Springs), for appellee.
Before MILLER, LOBREE and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM.

2
Affirmed. See All Fla. Sur. Co. v. Coker, 88 So. 2d 508, 510 (Fla. 1956)
(“A party to a written contract cannot defend against its enforcement on the
ground that he signed it without reading it, unless he aver facts showing
circumstances which prevented his reading the paper, or was induced by the
statements of the other parties to desist from reading it.” (quotation omitted));
Smith v. Am. Auto. Ins. Co., 498 So. 2d 448, 449 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (finding
insufficient evidence that insurance broker who was authorized to fill out
policy application forms was apparent agent of insurer where “there was no
representation made to Smith by AAIC with respect to Berwick’s authority to
act as its agent” and “Smith did not even know the name of the insurance
company involved”); Rodriguez v. Responsive Auto. Ins. Co., 388 So. 3d
846, 851 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (finding that insured presented insufficient
evidence to avoid insurer voiding policy due to misrepresentation where
insured attested that insurer’s agent incorrectly filled in blank fields on policy
application for him without obtaining sufficient information, but “did not attest
that he apprised the agent of the correct information or was prevented or
induced to refrain from reading the application. Nor did he claim the factual
inaccuracies were obscured or the agent sought to deceive the insurer”).