1

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

CASE NO.: ____________________

J.W. MARINER CORPORATION,

 Plaintiff/Petitioner,

vs.

ZURICH AMERICAN 

INSURANCE COMPANY, 

 Defendant/Respondent.

_______________________________/

RESPONDENT, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY'S,

NOTICE OF REMOVAL

The Respondent, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY 

("ZAIC"), a foreign corporation, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§§ 1332, 1441, 1446, and 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 81, hereby files this Notice of Removal requesting 

that this case be removed to the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of Florida, Panama City Division. The basis for the removal of this action 

is as follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. ZAIC is the Defendant/Respondent in a civil action styled as a 

"Petition to Compel Appraisal" (hereinafter the "Petition") brought by 

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 1 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

2

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

Plaintiff/Petitioner, 1

2. Pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 624.423, the Petitioner served the Petition on 

Florida's Chief Financial Officer on April 21, 2020, and ZAIC was provided notice 

of the Petition on April 23, 2020. A copy of the Notice of Service of Process 

attached hereto and incorporated herein Exhibit "B."

the J.W. MARINER CORPORATION ("J.W. MARINER")

and filed on or about April 20, 2020, seeking injunctive and/or declaratory relief 

and legal fees, in the Circuit Court of the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Bay

County, Florida, (Case No. 20000846CA) which is located within the Panama City 

Division of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. A

copy of the Petition is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A."

3. ZAIC has not responded to the Petition prior to filing this Notice of 

Removal and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule 81(c)(2)(C), ZAIC will have seven 

(7) days after this Notice of Removal is filed to answer the Petitioner's Complaint.

4. With respect to the time period for filing Notices of Removal, 28

U.S.C. § 1446(b) states in pertinent part, that "the notice of removal of a civil

action or proceeding shall be filed within 30 days after the receipt by the

defendant, through service or otherwise, of a copy of the initial pleading setting

forth the claim for relief upon which such action or proceeding is based ... ".

 1 Although the civil action is styled as a Petition (to Compel Appraisal), the parties are referenced 

as "Plaintiff" and "Defendant." 

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 2 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

3

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

5. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), thirty (30) days from the date ZAIC

was served the Petition is May 25, 2020.

6. Therefore, ZAIC's Notice of Removal is timely filed, as it is filed 

within thirty (30) days of ZAIC's registered agent's receipt of the Petition.

7. In compliance with the mandates of 28 U.S.C. § 1446, ZAIC attaches 

hereto a true, accurate, and complete copy of all process, pleadings, and other 

papers filed in the Circuit Court of the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Bay 

County, Florida together with a docket sheet from the Clerk of the Court. See

attached composite Exhibit "C."

II. NATURE OF THE LAWSUIT

8. J.W. MARINER's Petition alleges that ZAIC is an insurance company 

that was authorized to conduct business in Florida and that was engaged in the 

business of insurance in Bay County, Florida. See ¶3, Ex. "A."

9. J.W. MARINER's Petition alleges that it has an insurable interest in 

real property located in Panama City, Florida, which was insured by the 

Respondent, ZAIC. See ¶¶2-4, Ex. "A."

10. J.W. MARINER's Petition alleges that a wind event caused damage to 

the Petitioner's property which was covered by a policy of insurance issued by the 

Respondent, ZAIC. See ¶4, Ex. "A."

11. J.W. MARINER's Petition also asserts that Respondent has "failed to 

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 3 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

4

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

pay the full claim amount owed" for the loss and that the Petitioner has requested 

to resolve the alleged differences via a contractual appraisal provision and that 

Respondent ZAIC "has refused to participate in the appraisal process....". See ¶¶7-

9, Ex. "A."

12. J.W. MARINER's one-count Petition to Compel Appraisal alleges that 

Petitioner has complied with all conditions precedent to invoking the contractual

appraisal process in the ZAIC policy and Petitioner seeks relief in the form of a 

court order requiring ZAIC to name an appraiser and proceed with the contractual

appraisal process, as well as awarding Petitioner attorney's fees, costs and 

prejudgment interest. See ¶¶9-11, Ex. "A."

III. DIVERSITY JURISDICTION

13. This court has original jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. §

1332(a) because there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties.

14. In order to qualify for diversity jurisdiction, there must be complete

diversity between the parties, which means no plaintiff may be a citizen of the

same state as any defendant. See Pease v. Medtronic, Inc., 6 F. Supp. 2d 1354, 

1356 (S.D. Fla. 1998); see also Licari v. Am. Sec. Ins. Co., 8:12-CV-2853-T33EAJ, 2013 WL 268688, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 24, 2013) ("Original jurisdiction 

may be established if there is complete diversity of citizenship among the parties 

and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.").

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 4 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

5

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

15. Based upon the allegations in the Petition, the Petitioner, J.W. 

MARINER, maintains an insurable interest in real property located in Bay County, 

within the State of Florida. See ¶2, Ex. "A."

16. The Florida Division of Corporations lists Petitioner, J.W. 

MARINER, as an active Florida Profit Corporation with a principal address in 

Panama City, Florida. A copy of the 2019 Florida Profit Corporation Annual 

Report

17. The Respondent, ZAIC, at all times material is and was a New York 

corporation engaged in the insurance business with a statutory home office located 

at 4 World Trade Center, 150 Greenwich Street, New York, NY 10007, and its 

principal place of business located at 1299 Zurich Way, Schaumburg, Illinois 

60196. ZAIC was and is authorized to transact business and has transacted 

business in Florida. Thus, Respondent is deemed a citizen of New York and/or 

Illinois for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1).

, filed April 28, 2019 by Petitioner is attached hereto and incorporated 

herein as Exhibit "D". Thus, Petitioner is deemed a citizen of Florida for purposes 

of diversity jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1).

2

 2 A corporate party is deemed a citizen of the state of its incorporation and the state of its 

principal place of business. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). The principal place of business is either 

where the substantial predominance of corporate activity occurs or where the majority of 

executive and administrative operations occur. Bel-Bel Int’l Corp. v. Cnty. Bank of Homestead, 

162 F.3d 1101, 1106 (11th Cir. 1998); Jones v. Honeywell Int’l., Inc., 385 F. Supp. 2d 1268, 

1272 (M.D. Fla. 2005). In order to find a more uniform statutory interpretation of the phrase 

“principal place of business,” the U.S. Supreme Court adopted the “nerve center” test. Hertz

Corp v. Friend, 130 S. Ct. 1181, 1192-93 (U.S. 2010). This is where the corporation’s officers 

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 5 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

6

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

18. Further, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391, venue is proper in the Northern 

District of Florida, Panama City Division, because a substantial part of the events 

or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that 

is the subject of the action is situated in Bay County, Florida. See ¶2, Ex. "A."

IV.

19. Petitioner asserts that it seeks an unspecified amount of damages 

AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY

greater

20. Although J.W. MARINER's Petition does not plead a demand for

damages in an amount certain, where a plaintiff pleads an unspecified amount of 

damages, a defendant need only establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that 

the total amount in controversy more likely than not exceeds the jurisdictional 

threshold. See Leslie v. Conseco Life Ins. Co., 2012 WL 4049965, at *2 (S.D. Fla. 

2012) (citing Williams v. Best Buy Co., 269 F. 3d 1316, 1319 (l1th Cir. 2001)). The 

sufficiency of the amount in controversy is determined at the time of removal. Id. 

The pertinent question is what is in controversy in the case, not how much the 

plaintiff is ultimately likely to recover. Id. When a case has been removed pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1446, the moving party may provide additional evidence to satisfy 

than Thirty Thousand One Dollars ($30,001.00) not including costs, 

attorney's fees and prejudgment interest. See ¶1, Ex. "A."

 

direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities, not simply an office where the 

corporation holds its board meetings. Id. As such, ZAIC (a corporate party) is deemed to be a 

citizen of New York and/or Illinois where its principal place of business is located.

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 6 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

7

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

its burden. Id. However, a defendant may satisfy this requirement without 

additional evidence if it is facially apparent from the pleading itself that the amount 

in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional minimum. Id.

21. Although it is ZAIC's contention that it is facially apparent from the 

face of the Petition that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional 

minimum, Defendant has additional evidence demonstrating that the amount in 

controversy in this case exceeds the sum of $75,000.00. 

22. A contractual appraisal provision, such as the one contained in the 

ZAIC insurance policy sought to be invoked by the Petitioner, is a method to 

resolve a dispute regarding the dollar amount of a covered loss where the insured 

has first complied with the policy's post-loss conditions.3

23. Prior to having filed the instant Petition to Compel Appraisal, 

Petitioner's Public Adjuster wrote to ZAIC and provided a valuation of J.W. 

MARINER's loss in the amount of $

 See, e.g., Biscayne Cove 

Condo. Ass'n v. QBE Ins. Corp., 971 F. Supp. 2d 1121, 1136 (S.D. Fla. 2013).

5,681,073.57

 3 ZAIC does not agree that appraisal is appropriate in this matter, nor that it is ripe, and will 

address those substantive matters post-removal.

. A copy of the February 5, 2019 

correspondence from Strategic Claims Consultants as well as its estimate dated 

January 7, 2019, is attached hereto as Exhibit "E." See Mick v. De Vilbiss Air 

Power Co., 2010 WL 5140849 (M.D. Fla. 2010) (holding that generally, 

defendants can use demand letters as evidence that the case meets the court's 

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 7 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

8

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

jurisdictional requirement and is removable, especially when the demand letters are 

supported by facts).

24. To date, ZAIC has paid a total of $1,903,144.07 towards the 

Petitioner's loss, and has disputed the amount of $5,681,073.57 submitted by 

Strategic Claims Consultants on Petitioner's behalf, demonstrating that the amount 

in controversy between the parties is significantly greater than the $75,000.00 

required to trigger the jurisdiction of this Court.4

25. "In actions seeking declaratory relief or injunctive relief, the amount 

in controversy is measured by the value of the object of the litigation." Kinzer v. 

Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 08-80372-CIV, 2008 WL 11332054, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 

20, 2008) (citing Ericsson GE Mobile Commc'ns, Inc. v. Motorola Commc'ns & 

Elecs., Inc., 120 F.3d 216, 218 (11th Cir. 1997)). In other words, where injunctive 

relief is being sought the court must consider the “the monetary value of the object 

of the litigation that would flow to the plaintiffs if the injunction were granted.” Id.

(citing Leonard v. Enterprise Rent a Car, 279 F.3d 967, 973 (11th Cir. 2002)). 

 

26. The objective of an action seeking to compel appraisal of a property 

loss has been construed as an effort to recover monetary damages in the disputed 

amount of the property repairs, thus satisfying the amount in controversy 

requirement where such damages are alleged to exceed $75,000.00. Id. Here, 

 4 The total property damage limit within the operative ZAIC policy is $4,494,364.00.

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 8 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

9

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

Petitioner seeks a monetary award via the appraisal process in an amount 

significantly more than $75,000.00. See, e,g., Ex. E.

27. Moreover, Petitioner also seeks recovery of an unknown amount of 

attorney's fees, costs and interest, which also may be considered by the Court in 

determining if the jurisdictional amount has been met. See Leslie v. Conseco Life 

Ins. Co., 11-81035-CIV-MARRA, 2012 WL 4049965, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 13, 

2012) (quoting Morrisson v. Allstate Indem. Co., 228 F.3d 1255, 1265 (11th Cir. 

2000) ("The Eleventh Circuit has held that '[w]hen a statute authorizes the recovery 

of attorney's fees, a reasonable amount of those fees is included in the amount in 

controversy.").

V. NOTICE OF REMOVAL

28. ZAIC has filed this Notice of Removal within 30 days of being served 

with this Petition as required under 28 U.S.C. § 1446.

29. A Copy of this Notice of Removal has been provided to the Plaintiff

and is being filed contemporaneously with the Clerk of Court for the Fourteenth 

Judicial Circuit in and for Bay County, Florida.

30. ZAIC, by virtue of filing this Notice of Removal, does not waive any 

defenses or objections available to it under the law with regard to the substantive 

issues raised in the Petition regarding appraisal.

VI. CONCLUSION

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 9 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

10

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

This Notice of Removal complies with the requirements of the Federal

Statutes for removal based upon diversity jurisdiction. The Petitioner and 

Respondent in this matter are diverse in citizenship and the amount in controversy 

exceeds $75,000.00. Accordingly, based upon this Court's diversity jurisdiction, 

this action is properly removed from State Court to Federal Court, pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. §§1441, et seq.

WHEREFORE, the Respondent, ZAIC, respectfully requests that the civil 

action filed by the Petitioner, J.W. MARINER, in the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit in 

and for Bay County, Florida, be removed to this Court as provided by 28 U.S.C. 

§1441, et seq. and that this Honorable Court accept jurisdiction of this action and 

provide any and all other relief this Court deems just and appropriate.

Dated this 12th of May, 2020.

Respectfully submitted, 

DOUGLAS M. MCINTOSH

 s/ Douglas M. McIntosh

Florida Bar No.: 325597

dmcintosh@mscesq.com

DALE S. DOBULER

Florida Bar No.: 93403

ddobuler@mscesq.com

SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE 

SINGER & MAHONEY

1776 East Sunrise Blvd.

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33304 

Telephone: 954-765-1001

Facsimile: 954-765-1005

Attorneys for Defendant/Respondent

Zurich American Insurance Company

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 10 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

11

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 12th day of May, 2020, we 

electronically filed the foregoing documents with the Clerk of the Court using 

CM/ECF. We also certify the foregoing document is being served this day on all 

counsel or parties of record on the attached Service List in the manner specified, 

via transmission of Notice of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF and

electronic mail.

SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE 

SINGER & MAHONEY, LTD.

Attorneys for Defendant/Respondent

1776 East Sunrise Blvd.

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33304

Telephone: 954-765-1001

Facsimile: 954-765-1005

By:

 DOUGLAS M. MCINTOSH

 s/ Douglas M. McIntosh

 Florida Bar No: 325597

dmcintosh@mscesq.com

 DALE S. DOBULER

Florida Bar No: 93403

ddobuler@mscesq.com

 dmmpleadings@mscesq.com

 (for email service only)

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 11 of 12
CASE NO.: _____________

12

SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 1776 EAST SUNRISE BLVD • FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33304

TELEPHONE (954) 765-1001 FACSIMILE (954) 765-1005

SERVICE LIST

Kelly L. Kubiak, Esquire

kkubiak@merlinlawgroup.com

kubiakpleadings@merlinlawgroup.com

MERLIN LAW GROUP, P.A.

777 South Harbour Island Boulevard

Suite 950

Tampa, FL 33602

Telephone: (813) 229 - 1000

Facsimile: (407) 229 - 3692

(Attorneys for Plaintiff/Petitioner)

Case 5:20-cv-00143-TKW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/12/20 Page 12 of 12