Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit Rules Not Necessary for Insured to Include Estimate of Damages when Providing Notice of Supplemental Claim

By Zachary D. Sonenblum

In Great Lakes Ins. Se. v. Concourse Plaza A Condo. Ass’n, Inc., the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of Great Lakes, and held that an Insured does not need to include an estimate of damages when providing notice of a supplemental claim.

Relying on Goldberg v. Universal Property & Casualty Ins. Co., 302 So. 3d 919 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020), the lower District Court held that Fla. Stat. § 627.70132 requires an insured party’s notice of a supplemental claim to include an estimate of claimed damages. The district court reasoned that “[b]ecause Concourse Plaza’s September 2020 letter did not do so, the court ruled Concourse Plaza had failed to provide qualifying notice within three years as required by the statute.” 

Concourse Plaza appealed and argued that the plain text of the statute requires only that an insured’s notice of a supplemental claim comply “with the terms of the policy,” meaning that the notice need not include an estimate of damages if none is required by the insurance contract. Great Lakes argued that any notice of a supplemental claim under the statute must include an estimate of damages by the insured and argued that the Court should apply Goldberg.

On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit explained that Florida’s Third DCA already held in Patios West One Condominium Association, Inc. v. American Coastal Insurance Co., that “Fla. Stat. § 627.70132 does not require notice of a supplemental claim to contain an estimate of additional damages. Instead, the statute requires only that ‘the notice of a supplemental or reopened claim (1) be given to the insurer in accordance with the terms of the policy and (2) constitute an additional claim for recovery for losses from the same hurricane.’” Patios West One Condominium Association, Inc. v. American Coastal Insurance Co., 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 70 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024).

The Eleventh Circuit also explained that it did not even need to determine whether Goldberg applied, reasoning as follows:

because as a federal court applying state law, we are bound to apply Patios in any event. This lawsuit originated in the Miami Division of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. ‘State courts located there are within the territory of, and are bound to follow decisions issued by, the Third District Court of Appeal.’ Bravo, 532 F.3d at 1164. Therefore, because this is an appeal of a case arising out of the Miami Division, we apply the Third District Court of Appeal’s Patios decision. To the extent Patios conflicts with Goldberg, we follow Patios, as Goldberg was decided by the Fourth District Court of Appeal. Accordingly, in order for Concourse Plaza’s September 2020 letter to qualify as a valid notice of a supplemental claim under § 627.70132, it must have been ‘given to the insurer in accordance with the terms of the policy’ and ‘constitute an additional claim for recovery for losses from the same hurricane.’ Patios, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 70, 2024 WL 24782, at *5 (quotation omitted).

Great Lakes Ins. Se. v. Concourse Plaza A Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 8958 at *7-8 (11th Cir. 2024). 

The Court further noted that Great Lakes conceded that “the insurance policy by itself ‘does not impose a requirement to provide an estimate of damages.’” Accordingly, the Court held that the Insured’s September 2020 letter “qualified as notice of a supplemental claim under Fla. Stat. § 627.70132. Because it was sent within three years of the date Hurricane Irma made landfall, the provisions of Fla. Stat. § 627.70132 were satisfied,” and reversed the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of Great Lakes.