(Gridview_imagefull / Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services)
The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal with prejudice of a policyholder's bad faith claim against his homeowner's carrier in Julien v. United Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., ___ So. 3d ___, No. 4D19-2763, 2021 WL 824438 (Fla. 4th DCA March 3, 2021).
On the facts, the appellate court pointed out that the carrier advanced payment to the policyholder while the carrier's investigation of his fire claim was pending. The carrier also put him up in a hotel during that time. Julien, 2021 WL 824438, at *1.
These facts did not determine the appellate court's holding in this case, however. Its holding that a bad faith claim was not available under Florida law in that case was based instead on the quality of the policyholder's Civil Remedy Notice:
Julien's civil remedy notice, it seems, listed every statutory provision and every policy provision available to him as the insured. For example, Julien included fourteen statutory provisions followed by twenty-one sections of the Florida Administrative Code. Furthermore, as the “specific policy language” relevant to the violation, Julien referenced the entire policy[.]
Julien, 2021 WL 824438, at *3.
This behavior ran afoul of the Florida statute that authorizes bad faith actions against first-party insurers like Mr. Julien's homeowner's carrier in this case. The Florida bad faith statute requires specificity of what was violated, in the Civil Remedy Notice that accuses the carrier of misconduct. In this case, the CRN was woefully inadequate in the eyes of both the appellate court and the trial judge:
Here, Julien did not substantially comply with the specificity standard and this was more than a mere technical defect. Julien listed nearly all policy sections and cited thirty-five statutory provisions. As a result, we conclude the circuit court correctly determined that Julien failed to satisfy the requirement that the insured identify the specific statute and specific policy provision relevant to Universal Property's alleged violation.
Julien, 2021 WL 824438, at *3. Although the Florida appellate panel in this case issued this substitute opinion in March 2021 to supersede and replace the opinion it released in September 2020, the result did not change. The panel affirmed the trial court's dismissal of Mr. Julien's statutory bad faith claim with prejudice, and denied his motion to certify a question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court for resolution.
As seen by the Florida appellate panel in this case, the answer to the question was already clear to Florida lawyers and judges, and to the Florida public.
Please read the disclaimer. ©2021 Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved.
Comments