Case Name: GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Mary BOTTINI, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Gerard Bottini, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2012-07-20
Citations: 93 So. 3d 476
Docket Number: No. 2D11-1943
Parties: GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Mary BOTTINI, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Gerard Bottini, Appellee.
Judges: KHOUZAM and MORRIS, JJ„ Concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 93
Pages: 476–478

Head Matter:
GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Mary BOTTINI, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Gerard Bottini, Appellee.
No. 2D11-1943.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
July 20, 2012.
Paul L. Nettleton of Carlton Fields, P.A., Miami, and Dorothy V. DiFiore of Haas, Lewis, DiFiore & Amos, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant.
George A. Vaka of Vaka Law Group, Tampa, and C. Steven Yerrid of The Yer-rid Law Firm, Tampa, for Appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Geico General Insurance Company raised five issues in this appeal. We conclude that none of the issues warrants reversal. We note that Geico's arguments include claims of error that impacted the amount of damages determined by the jury. The jury verdict found that the Estate's damages were $80,872,266. But the judgment amount entered by the trial court against Geico is $50,000, based on the applicable insurance policy limits. Based on the evidence presented, we are satisfied that even if Geico were correct that errors may have affected the jury's computation of damages, in the context of this case and the amount of the judgment, any such errors were harmless. Thus, we do not address further Geico's claims of error.
Affirmed.
KHOUZAM and MORRIS, JJ" Concur.
ALTENBERND, J., Concurs with opinion.