Case Law Update: Fonollosa v. American Integrity — Third DCA Affirms Dismissal of Bad-Faith Claim Over Deficient Civil Remedy Notice

On October 22, 2026, Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a Miami-Dade circuit court judgment in favor of American Integrity Insurance Company of Florida in Fonollosa v. American Integrity Insurance Company of Florida, No. 3D24-1777. Policyholder Joshua Fonollosa and co-appellants appealed from Miami-Dade Circuit Court case No. 14-21984-CA-01. Judges Miller, Lobree, and Gooden affirmed per curiam; the decision is not final until any timely rehearing motion is resolved.

What the Opinion Says

The opinion is a one-word affirmance followed by citations. It does not recite the facts or explain the trial court’s rulings, but its citations identify four rules the panel treated as controlling.

1. A civil remedy notice has to be specific. The panel led with section 624.155(3)(b), Florida Statutes (2020), and quoted its requirement that the notice “shall state with specificity” the following: “1. The statutory provision, including the specific language of the statute, which the authorized insurer allegedly violated. 2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the violation. . . . 4. Reference to specific policy language that is relevant to the violation, if any.” The court then cited Julien v. United Property & Casualty Insurance Co., 311 So. 3d 875, 879 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), describing it as “affirming dismissal of insured’s statutory bad faith claim where civil remedy notice failed to specify statutory and policy provisions at issue,” and Demase v. State Farm Florida Insurance Co., 351 So. 3d 136, 138 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022), which it summarized as “concluding that even under ‘more lenient substantial compliance test’ insured’s bad faith claim failed because civil remedy notice did not comply with section 624.155’s specificity requirements.”

2. Rehearing is not a second chance to raise new arguments. The panel cited its own decision in Bank of America, N.A. v. Bank of New York Mellon, 338 So. 3d 338, 341 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022), for the rule that “a trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for reconsideration or rehearing which raises an issue that could have [been], but wasn’t, raised in the initial motion or at the initial hearing.”

3. Punitive damages require leave of court first. Citing Simeon, Inc. v. Cox, 671 So. 2d 158, 160 (Fla. 1996), the court repeated that under section 768.72, Florida Statutes, “a plaintiff must obtain leave from the trial court to amend the complaint before punitive damages may be asserted,” and that “any punitive damages claim alleged prior to a party asking for and receiving leave of the court must be dismissed or stricken.”

4. An order denying interest can be final and appealable. The last citation, Roberts v. International Speedway Corp., 542 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), is described as “explaining that order denying motion to assess interest constituted final order where nothing else remained to be done in the cause.”

Why the Civil Remedy Notice Rule Matters

A statutory bad-faith claim against a Florida insurer cannot be filed until the policyholder serves a civil remedy notice on the Department of Financial Services and the insurer, which then has 60 days to cure. The statute’s current text still requires the notice to state with specificity the provision violated, the facts, the individuals involved, the relevant policy language, and a statement that it is given to perfect the civil remedy. Section 624.155 has been amended since the 2020 version applied here, most recently in 2023, so the governing wording depends on when the notice was filed.

The Fonollosa citations reinforce decisions holding that a notice which cites the wrong statute, omits policy language, or describes the violation only generally will not support a bad-faith suit, even under a “substantial compliance” standard. The case number indicates the dispute was opened in 2014.

What This Means If You Have a Property Insurance Claim

• The civil remedy notice is a pleading, not a form letter. Identify the specific subsection of section 624.155 at issue, quote the statutory language, describe the facts, name the adjusters involved, and quote the policy provisions the insurer allegedly ignored. A notice missing one element can be challenged years later.
• Fix a deficient notice before suing. The opinion does not address whether the notice could have been cured. The safer course is to review it for specificity before the cure period runs and file a corrected notice if it is vague.
• Raise every argument at the first hearing. The Bank of America citation signals that at least one argument was first raised on rehearing, which trial courts need not consider.
• Do not plead punitive damages without leave. Section 768.72 requires a motion and an evidentiary showing first; a claim pleaded without leave is subject to being stricken.
• Watch for final orders on interest. Under the Roberts citation, an order denying interest after the rest of the case has concluded is final, which starts the appeal clock.

Because the opinion does not state the facts, it signals which rules the Third District applied rather than what happened below. Every claim turns on its own policy language and procedural history, and this decision does not predict the result in any other case. If your property insurance claim has been denied, underpaid, or delayed, see our guide to denied insurance claims in Florida. Louis Law Group offers a free case evaluation.

Case details: Joshua Fonollosa, et al. v. American Integrity Insurance Company of Florida, No. 3D24-1777 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 22, 2026) (per curiam affirmed, with citations), on appeal from Miami-Dade Circuit Court No. 14-21984-CA-01 (Judges Tanya Brinkley and Gina Beovides). Counsel: Neblett Law Group for appellants; Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A. for appellee. Not final until disposition of any timely motion for rehearing. Status current as of October 26, 2026.

This article is for general information and is not legal advice. It summarizes a published appellate opinion; quotations are taken from the opinion. More rulings are collected on our Case Law & Industry Insights page.