Florida Supreme Court Rejects Retroactive Property Insurance Presuit Notice Requirement

Florida Supreme Court Clarifies Presuit Notice Requirements

Case: Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company v. Rebecca Hughes
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Date: October 22, 2026
Docket: SC2024-0025
Citation: No. SC2024-0025 (Fla. Oct. 22, 2026)

Facts

Rebecca Hughes held a homeowners insurance policy issued by Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company for the period from April 24, 2019, through April 24, 2020. On May 29, 2019, Hughes submitted a claim for water damage. Universal investigated the claim and issued payment, but Hughes maintained that the amount was insufficient. Relying on three repair bids, she demanded additional benefits.

Section 627.70152, Florida Statutes, became effective on July 1, 2021. The statute required a property-insurance claimant to submit a notice of intent to initiate litigation through the Florida Department of Financial Services at least 10 business days before filing suit. It also gave insurers another opportunity to evaluate the claim, make payment, request alternative dispute resolution, or maintain a coverage denial.

Hughes sued Universal on August 4, 2021, without submitting the statutory notice. Universal moved to dismiss, arguing that the new requirement governed her lawsuit even though the policy had been issued in 2019. The circuit court agreed and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The Sixth District Court of Appeal reversed, creating or deepening a conflict with decisions holding that the requirement applied to suits filed after the statute's effective date regardless of when the policy was issued.

Ruling

The Florida Supreme Court approved the Sixth District's decision and disapproved the Fourth District's contrary decision in Cole v. Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Co. The Court held that section 627.70152's presuit notice requirement does not apply retroactively to property-insurance policies issued before July 1, 2021.

Applying the retroactivity framework from Menendez v. Progressive Express Insurance Co., the Court looked first for a clear legislative command making the statute retroactive. It found none. The phrase “all suits” identified the types of suits covered by the statute; it did not clearly extend the law to previously issued policies. Legislative silence could not establish retroactive intent.

The Court also rejected Universal's argument that the notice requirement was merely procedural. Viewed as a whole, the statute materially affected substantive rights and obligations by delaying an insured's ability to sue, requiring dismissal for noncompliance, giving insurers additional time and a safe harbor to pay claims, and, under section 627.70152(8)(b), Florida Statutes (2021) (repealed 2022), barring recovery of fees incurred before a dismissal for noncompliance. The Sixth District's reversal of the dismissal therefore remained in place.

Takeaway for Public Adjusters and Claims Professionals

The policy's issuance date can control which statutory claim procedures apply. For breach-of-policy actions arising under policies issued before July 1, 2021, carriers cannot rely on section 627.70152 to impose the 2021 presuit-notice requirement retroactively. Public adjusters should preserve the policy, declarations, claim correspondence, estimates, payment records, and repair bids so counsel can evaluate the governing law. The decision does not eliminate other contractual or statutory duties that may apply to a particular claim.

How Louis Law Group Can Help

Louis Law Group assists Florida policyholders and claims professionals with underpaid property claims, coverage disputes, and presuit requirements. For a case-specific review, call (833) 657-4812.

Source: View Full Opinion on CourtListener

← Back to All Case Law Updates