Case Law Update: Universal Property v. Griffin — Florida Carrier Appeals Property Insurance Coverage Dispute

Introduction

In Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company v. Jada Griffin, No. 3D-2026 (Fla. 3d DCA, February 25, 2026), the Third District Court of Appeal addressed a property insurance coverage dispute between Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company and policyholder Jada Griffin. This case adds to the growing body of Florida appellate decisions defining the boundaries of carrier obligations in first-party property insurance claims.

Full Court Opinion: Read Universal Property v. Griffin on CourtListener

For public adjusters, the case provides additional guidance on how Florida courts evaluate coverage disputes when carriers challenge trial court rulings that favored policyholders.

Background and Facts

Jada Griffin held a property insurance policy with Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company. After sustaining damage to her property, Griffin filed a first-party insurance claim. A dispute arose between Griffin and Universal regarding the scope of coverage and the carrier's obligations under the policy.

The matter proceeded through the trial court, where Universal contested coverage. When the trial court ruled, Universal appealed to the Third District Court of Appeal.

The Court's Decision

The Third DCA evaluated Universal's arguments on appeal and rendered its decision in the context of Florida's established framework for first-party property insurance disputes. The court applied the de novo standard of review applicable to coverage determinations and assessed whether the trial court properly interpreted the policy provisions at issue.

Universal Property & Casualty is a frequent litigant in Florida's appellate courts, having been involved in numerous property insurance disputes across the state's district courts of appeal. This pattern reflects broader industry tensions between carrier coverage positions and policyholder expectations in the Florida market.

Key Takeaways for Public Adjusters

• Universal Property continues to litigate aggressively. This is one of multiple recent appellate decisions involving Universal Property & Casualty, including Universal Property v. Rodriguez (Fla. 3d DCA, Feb. 6, 2026). PAs filing claims against Universal should expect aggressive coverage positions and potential litigation.
• Know your carrier's appellate history. Reviewing a carrier's recent appellate track record helps PAs and their counsel anticipate the arguments the carrier will raise. Universal's pattern of appealing trial court losses signals their litigation strategy.
• Trial court wins for policyholders are defensible on appeal. Florida's appellate courts continue to review property insurance cases carefully, applying established standards that protect policyholder interests when the evidence supports coverage.
• Document coverage arguments early. PAs should identify and document the specific policy provisions supporting coverage from the outset of the claim. This documentation becomes the foundation if the claim proceeds to litigation and eventual appeal.

How This Affects Your Practice

If you're handling claims against Universal Property & Casualty, be prepared for a carrier that actively contests coverage at every stage — from initial denial through appeal. Build your claim file with litigation in mind: detailed damage documentation, clear policy analysis, and thorough estimate support.

Understanding Universal's appellate posture across recent Florida DCA decisions helps PAs counsel their policyholders on realistic timelines and expectations when a claim with this carrier escalates to litigation.

Practical Advice for Similar Cases

If you are handling a claim against a carrier known for aggressive coverage disputes:

• Build the claim file for litigation from the start. Detailed photos, moisture readings, thermal imaging, and independent estimates strengthen your position.
• Research the carrier's appellate track record to anticipate their denial strategy.
• Submit thorough supplemental claims with line-item comparisons showing where the carrier's estimate falls short.
• Don't delay referring to counsel. A demand letter from counsel often prompts more serious settlement consideration.
• Track all statutory deadlines. Violations are leverage in settlement and bad faith claims.

Conclusion

Need help with a similar claim? Submit your policy for a free review by our property damage attorneys, or call us at 833-657-4812.