DOREEN GOODEN AND WINSETT BROWN
v.
PEOPLE'S TRUST INSURANCE COMPANY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court reversed dismissal of bad faith insurance claim, holding that plaintiff's civil remedy notice satisfied statutory specificity requirements under section 624.155 by citing nine statutory provisions and one policy provision relevant to the allegations.
A civil remedy notice under section 624.155, Florida Statutes, satisfies specificity requirements when it cites the statutory and policy provisions relevant to the bad faith allegations, even if fewer than the thirty-five provisions cited in a prior case.
[1] A civil remedy notice under section 624.155, Florida Statutes, satisfies specificity requirements by citing only the statutory and policy provisions relevant to the bad f…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDoreen Gooden and Winsett Brown filed a bad faith complaint against their insurer, People's Trust Insurance Company, alleging violations of nine statu…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Civil Remedy cases and more on FLexlaw
KUNTZ, J.
Doreen Gooden and Winsett Brown filed a complaint against their insurer, People’s Trust Insurance Company, alleging bad faith under section 624.155, Florida Statutes (2018). The circuit court granted People’s Trust’s motion to dismiss, concluding Gooden’s civil remedy notice failed to meet section 624.155’s specificity requirements. We reverse.
Gooden alleged that People’s Trust acted in bad faith by violating nine provisions of sections 624.155 and 626.9541, Florida Statutes (2018). To cure, Gooden stated that People’s Trust must “tender all insurance proceeds owed to [her], as set forth in the Appraisal Award, for damages to [her] home, including interest, for the loss described herein.” People’s Trust responded to Gooden’s demand, raising multiple issues and defenses. Because People’s Trust did not cure in the manner demanded, Gooden filed suit. But citing Julien v. United Property & Casualty Insurance Co., 311 So. 3d 875 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), the circuit court dismissed the suit for failure to meet section 624.155’s specificity requirements.
In Julien, the civil remedy notice “listed nearly all policy sections and cited thirty-five statutory provisions.” 311 So. 3d at 879. Gooden’s civil remedy notice cited nine statutory provisions and a single policy provision, listing only the statutory and policy provisions relevant to his allegations. While People’s Trust raises multiple arguments in opposition to the merits of Gooden’s bad-faith claim, those arguments are best left for consideration on a motion for summary judgment. Those arguments do not support dismissing Gooden’s claim for failure to satisfy section 624.155’s specificity requirements.
Gooden’s notice facially satisfied section 624.155’s specificity requirements. So the circuit court’s order dismissing Gooden’s complaint for failing to do so is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
CONNER, C.J., and FORST, J., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Junior Julien v. United Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 311 So. 3d 875 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020)