Disability Benefits
Kendall v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. and Bank of America, 2:26-CV-950-KCH-KRH (M.D. Fla., Aug. 11, 2026 (Dudek, J.) (granting in part and denying in part Defendants’ motion to dismiss, dismissing Kendall’s ERISA benefits-recovery claim with prejudice because it was barred by the plan’s contractual limitations period and accrued years earlier under the ERISA “clear repudiation” rule, which provides that a claim accrues when the claimant has reason to know her benefits were denied or underpaid, and dismissing Kendall’s breach-of-fiduciary-duty claim without prejudice because it was based on the same factual allegations as her benefits claim and therefore duplicated a remedy already available under ERISA § 1132(a)(1)(B)). https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2026-00950-26-2-cv
General Liability Insurance
Mt. Hawley Ins. Co. v. H&M Builders, LLC, Personal Rep. Gloria Escalante., 8 24-10460 (11th Cir., Aug. 11, 2026 (Kidd, J., with Newsom, J. concurring) (dismissing Mt. Hawley’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that once the underlying state wrongful-death action settled and was dismissed, there was no longer a live controversy regarding the insurer’s duty to defend, making the declaratory-judgment dispute moot; further, even if the state-court action were still pending, the interlocutory summary-judgment order was not immediately appealable because it lacked the injunctive qualities required under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), and any challenge to the duty-to-defend ruling must instead be pursued through an appeal from the district court’s subsequently entered final judgment). https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202410460.pdf
Property Insurance
- Bryant v. Nationwide Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 8:26-cv-1386-KKM-AAS (M.D. Fla., Aug. 13, 2026 (Arnold Sansone, J.) (granting Nationwide’s motion to compel plaintiffs’ automatic discovery exchange and request for attorneys’ fees, holding that plaintiffs failed to comply with the discovery deadline, did not respond to Nationwide’s conferral attempts, and failed to timely respond to the motion, allowing it to be treated as unopposed under Local Rule 3.01(d)). https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2026-01386-17-8-cv
- Earnhardt Building Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Vantage Risk Specialty Ins. Co.., 2:26-cv-1664-KCD-KRH (M.D. Fla., Aug. 11, 2026 (Dudek, J.) (denying Vantage’s motion to dismiss, holding that although Florida Statute § 627.70152’s pre-suit notice requirement is a substantive condition precedent that applies in federal court, Earnhardt adequately pleaded compliance by generally alleging that “[a]ll conditions precedent” had been satisfied, as permitted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(c)). https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2026-01664-26-2-cv
Surety Construction Bonds
The Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v. A.O. Industrial Solutions, LLC, James Aiena and Sarita Aiena., 8:26-cv-239-TPB-AAS (M.D. Fla., Aug. 12, 2026 (Barber, J.) (affirming and adopting the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation and denying without prejudice plaintiff’s motion for default judgment against A.O. Industrial Solutions for failure to respond to the complaint, holding that because James and Sarita Aiena may be jointly and severally liable with the defaulting defendant, entering default judgment at this stage could create inconsistent judgments). https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2026-00239-31-8-cv
The Fine Print:
The cases discussed are not a comprehensive list of all Florida decisions from this week. SLC may omit some, including PCAs and procedural rulings unrelated to coverage. SLC also excludes any cases in which I am or have been personally involved. These summaries are provided solely for informational purposes and do not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. Any opinions expressed are my own and are not intended as legal guidance for any specific situation.