Jury Awards $631K in Insurance Dispute Over Storm Damage
Table of Contents
Homeowner Turned to Insurance After Storm Damage
Rebeka Perera lived in Miami-Dade County and owned a home on SW 179th Terrace. On November 8, 2020, Tropical Storm Eta hit the area. Perera believed the storm severely damaged her home. She held an active homeowner’s insurance policy with Heritage Property & Casualty Insurance Company at the time.
She filed a claim after the storm. She said she could not locate a certified copy of the policy but expected Heritage to produce it during the case.
Storm Claim Led to Coverage Dispute
Perera reported damage to drywall, flooring, cabinetry, appliances, and electrical systems. She said she followed all required policy steps, including protecting the home and documenting repairs.
Despite this, Heritage refused to pay the full amount she believed was owed. Perera argued the company failed to uphold its contract and neglected its responsibility to cover the storm-related loss.
Denied Coverage Created Financial Stress
Perera claimed the denial caused financial strain and left her home in need of repairs. She also hired attorneys to pursue the benefits she believed were rightfully hers.
The legal process became necessary, she said, after Heritage failed to resolve the claim. She turned to the court to enforce her rights under the policy.
Damages
Perera asked for full compensation to repair storm damage. She also requested interest, attorney’s fees, and court costs.
She cited Florida law supporting recovery of legal expenses in coverage disputes. She argued she followed the policy terms and was entitled to full benefits.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Rebeka Perera
Counsel for Plaintiff: Robert Jonathan Lee | Amado A. Alvarez | Benjamin R. Alvarez
Defendant: Heritage Property & Casualty Insurance Company
Counsel for Defendant: Eric N. Simon | Laura Michelle Myers-Schader | Oliver Wragg
Expert Witness for Defendant: Alex Puig | Damon Campbell
Two Legal Grounds Behind the Lawsuit
First Claim – Breach of Contract
Perera said she paid all premiums and fulfilled every obligation under the policy. She claimed Heritage breached the agreement by failing to pay for covered losses, which caused additional hardship.
Second Claim – Request for Court Declaration
Perera asked the court to confirm that the damage was covered. She also requested a ruling that she met all policy terms. If the policy language was unclear, she asked the court to interpret it in her favor.
Defense
Heritage Property & Casualty Insurance Company denied liability for Rebeka Perera’s storm damage claim and raised five defenses. They argued the damage predated the storm, pointing to similar ceiling stains from a 2017 claim. Their engineers found no storm-created opening, and the company said Perera waited over 250 days to report the loss, which prejudiced their investigation.
They also claimed the damage resulted from neglect, not a covered peril. Finally, they accused Perera of misrepresenting when she discovered the damage, citing conflicting statements between her interrogatory responses and deposition. Based on these defenses, Heritage requested a jury trial.
Jury Verdict
On May 2, 2025, the jury found that Plaintiff Rebeka Perera sustained a covered loss during the policy period under her insurance with Heritage Property & Casualty Insurance Company. The jury rejected the defendant’s claim that policy exclusions barred coverage. As a result, the jury awarded Perera $631,187.40 in total damages.