Auto Insurance
Travelers Property Casualty Ins. Co. v. Davis, 24-13310 (11th Cir., Aug. 18, 2026- Pryor, CJ.) (affirming in part and reversing in part, holding that Kamesha Davis was a resident of the Highway 308 property at the time of the accident but that the district court erred in concluding as a matter of law that she was a member of her mother’s household for purposes of uninsured motorist coverage under the Travelers policy, and reasoning that Davis lived at Highway 308 with the intent to remain there “for the time being,” making her a resident, but found genuine disputes of material fact regarding whether her mother’s household was located there and whether mother and daughter had actually merged their households or maintained separate households under different managements, precluding summary judgment). https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/files/202413310.pdf
Disability Income Insurance
Tassinari v. RiverSource Life Ins. Co., 2:26-cv-1828-SPC-KRH (M.D. of Fla., Aug. 20, 2026- Polster Chappell, J.) (granting RiverSource Life Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss Counts II, III, and V of the complaint, dismissing the breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and unjust enrichment claims with prejudice, and dismissing the Florida Unfair Insurance Trade Practices Act claim without prejudice, and reasoning that Florida law does not recognize an independent cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in this insurance context, the statutory insurance-practices claim was not ripe because the required prerequisites had not been alleged, and unjust enrichment was unavailable because the parties agreed that a valid and enforceable insurance policy governed the same subject matter). https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2026-01828-25-2-cv
General Liability Insurance
Ohio Security Ins. Co. v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc., 2:25-cv-581-SPC-NPM (M.D. of Fla., Aug. 20, 2026- Polster Campell, J.) (granting Ohio Security Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment and denying Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc.’s cross-motion, declaring that Candu Investment, LLC was an additional insured under Harbor Freight’s Everest policy, that the Everest policy provided primary coverage while Ohio Security’s policy was excess, and that Harbor Freight was responsible for reimbursing Ohio Security for the remaining self-insured retention related to the settlement of the underlying injury claim, and reasoning that the underlying claim arose from Harbor Freight’s use of the leased premises and therefore triggered the policy’s additional-insured coverage for Candu, making Everest the primary insurer and Ohio Security excess, which required Harbor Freight to satisfy the remaining self-insured retention obligation). https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2025-00581-86-2-cv
Employee Disability Benefits Insurance
Bennett v. Hartford Life and Accident Ins. Co., 25-cv-21039-RAR (S.D. of Fla., Aug. 21, 2026- Ruiz II, J.) (granting in part the plaintiff’s motion and dismissing the ERISA action without prejudice, while denying transfer to New York and ordering that if the plaintiff refiles the same action, she must reimburse the defendant for the costs incurred in defending this case, and reasoning that venue in the Southern District of Florida was proper under ERISA’s broad venue provision because Hartford could be “found” in the district, transfer was not warranted because the case had been actively litigated for seventeen months and was already at the summary judgment stage, and dismissal was appropriate because the plaintiff’s alternative request for voluntary dismissal went unopposed, although the Court conditioned any future refiling on payment of the defendant’s costs). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-flsd-1_25-cv-21039/pdf/USCOURTS-flsd-1_25-cv-21039-1.pdf
Group Long-Term Disability Insurance
Mead v. Life Ins. Co. of North America, 8:24-cv-2756-TPB-AEP (M.D. of Fla., Aug. 20, 2026- Barber, J.) (granting summary judgment for Life Insurance Company of North America and denying the plaintiff’s ERISA claim for long-term disability benefits, concluding that the insurer reasonably determined that Catherine Mead no longer met the policy’s “any occupation” definition of disability, and reasoning that, even assuming the benefits denial was de novo wrong, substantial medical and vocational evidence supported the insurer’s conclusion that Mead could perform sedentary occupations for which she was or could become qualified, and neither alleged procedural deficiencies nor the insurer’s structural conflict of interest rendered the decision arbitrary and capricious). https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2024-02756-122-8-cv
Home Insurance
Newman v. American Home Assurance Co., Inc., 22-cv-20979-JB (S.D. of Fla., Aug. 17, 2026- Becerra, J.) (denying the plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial on damages, holding that they were not entitled to retry their claim for damages arising from the insurer’s violation of the Florida Unfair Claim Settlement Practices Act, and reasoning that the problem was not merely insufficient evidence of damages but a complete absence of evidence from which the jury or court could calculate the claimed lease-interest damages, and further held that any objection to the jury’s allegedly ambiguous verdict was waived because plaintiffs failed to raise it before the jury was discharged). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-flsd-1_22-cv-20979/pdf/USCOURTS-flsd-1_22-cv-20979-2.pdf
Property Insurance
Citizens Property Ins. Co. v. Blanco Suarez, et al., 3D24-2256 (3rd Dist. of Fla., Aug. 19, 2026- Fernandez, J.) (reversing the trial court’s denial of Citizens Property Insurance Corporation’s motion for attorney’s fees and remanded with instructions to award fees, holding that Citizens’ $100 proposal for settlement was made in good faith under section 768.79, and reasoning that Citizens had a reasonable basis to believe its exposure was nominal because the insureds waited two years to report the Hurricane Irma claim and failed to provide requested documents, both of which formed the basis for Citizens’ denial of coverage, making the timing of the offer and the public adjuster’s damage estimate insufficient to establish bad faith). https://flcourts-media.flcourts.gov/content/download/2494038/opinion/Opinion_2024-2256.pdf
UM Auto Insurance
- Kirton, Jr. v. Trisura Specialty Ins. Co., 8:26-cv-1879-VMC-AEP (M.D. of Fla., Aug. 19, 2026, Hernandez Covington, J.) (granting the plaintiff’s motion to remand and returning the uninsured/underinsured motorist case to state court, holding that the defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 threshold required for federal diversity jurisdiction, and reasoning that the only concrete damages supported by the record were approximately $30,841 in past medical expenses, while the plaintiff’s $100,000 settlement demand, projected future medical expenses, pain and suffering, and alleged lost earnings were too speculative or unsupported to establish the jurisdictional amount). https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2026-01879-22-8-cv
- Tabares v. Progressive Select Ins. Co., 8:26-cv-2293-VMC-AEP (M.D. of Fla., Aug. 20, 2026- Hernandez Covington, J.) (remanding the uninsured motorist insurance action to Florida state court, holding that Progressive Select Insurance Company failed to establish federal diversity jurisdiction because it did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, and reasoning that the plaintiff’s $100,000 pre-suit demand letter was largely unsupported and reflected “puffing and posturing,” as the only concrete damages shown were approximately $16,000 in past medical expenses, while the claimed future medical expenses and millions of dollars in pain-and-suffering damages were too speculative to satisfy the jurisdictional threshold). https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2026-02293-15-8-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.