Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Hurricane Wilma struck causing significant damage to property owned by P. P filed a claim with D, its property insurer, pursuant to an insurance policy providing property coverage to D. D submitted an estimate of damages on December 18, 2005, and then submitted a sworn proof of loss on July 12, 2006. Dissatisfied with D's investigation and processing of its claim, P filed suit in the United States District Court. P raised claims for declaratory judgment, breach of contract-failure to provide coverage, breach of contract-breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing, and violation of Fla. Stat. § 627.701(4)(a). The district court concluded that § 627.701 does not provide a private right of action, and then held a jury trial on the remaining claims. The jury found for P on all of its claims, awarding P $7,868,211 for D's failure to provide coverage ($2,000,000 of which was awarded for 'ordinance or law' coverage) and $271,888.68 for breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing, for a total award of $8,140,099.68. The jury concluded that the Policy did not comply with § 627.701(4)(a). D then filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law, a motion for a new trial, and a motion to alter or amend the judgment. The district court granted D's motion to amend the judgment by applying the hurricane deductible contained in the Policy despite the jury's conclusion that the Policy did not comply with the requirements for hurricane deductible provisions set forth in § 627.701(4)(a). The district court entered an amended final judgment in favor of P in the amount of $7,237,223.88, with post-judgment interest accruing in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961. Both parties appealed. The Eleventh Circuit certified five questions: 1. Does Florida law recognize a claim for breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing by an insured against its insurer based on the insurer's failure to investigate and assess the insured's claim within a reasonable period of time? 2. If Florida law recognizes a claim for breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing based on an insurer's failure to investigate and assess its insured's claim within a reasonable period of time, is the good faith and fair dealing claim subject to the same bifurcation requirement applicable to a bad faith claim under Fla. Stat. § 624.155? 3. May an insured bring a claim against an insurer for failure to comply with the language and type-size requirements established by Fla. Stat. § 627.701(4)(a)? 4. Does an insurer's failure to comply with the language and type-size requirements established by Fla. Stat. § 627.701(4)(a) render a noncompliant hurricane deductible provision in an insurance policy void and unenforceable? 5. Does language in an insurance policy mandating payment of benefits upon 'entry of a final judgment' require an insurer to pay its insured upon entry of judgment at the trial level?

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.