Second DCA ruling

Florida's Late-Notice Burden Now Depends on Your County

In DeSoto, Hillsborough, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas and Sarasota counties, the insurer now carries the burden of proving prejudice from late notice. In Miami-Dade and Monroe, prejudice is still presumed and the insured must rebut it.

By Andy Rouhafzai, Founder2 min read

Photo: USFWS Southeast Region via Wikimedia Commons

On July 22, 2026, the Second DCA reversed in part a Manatee County summary judgment in SFR Services, LLC a/a/o Wild Oak Bay Owner Association, Inc. v. American Coastal Insurance Co., No. 2D2024-1947.1 Hurricane Irma made landfall September 10, 2017. The association reported its claim July 29, 2020, a 1053-day delay by the trial court's count.1 The panel affirmed that notice was not prompt as a matter of law, then reversed on prejudice and gave the burden to the insurer.

American Coastal wrote the exception itself. Its policy said the insurer has "no duty to provide coverage under this Policy if the failure to comply with the following [listed] duties is prejudicial to [us],"1 and prompt notice sat in that list beside duties like cooperation, which carry no common-law presumption. The structure means the listed duties get treated alike, the court held, so the carrier "removed any presumption of prejudice." The panel certified conflict with Arce v. Citizens, 388 So. 3d 205 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024),2 and sided with Perez v. Citizens, 345 So. 3d 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022).3 The Florida Supreme Court has been here: in Arce it declined to exercise jurisdiction and denied review, No. SC2024-0174, April 26, 2024.4

Who must prove prejudice after late notice, by Florida appellate district (as of August 6, 2026)
DistrictCountiesWho carries the burdenControlling decision
SecondDeSoto, Hillsborough, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas, SarasotaInsurer must prove prejudiceWild Oak Bay, 2D2024-1947 (2026)
FourthBroward, Indian River, Martin, Okeechobee, Palm Beach, St. LucieInsurer must prove prejudicePerez, 345 So. 3d 893 (2022)
ThirdMiami-Dade, MonroePresumed; insured must rebutArce, 388 So. 3d 205 (2024)
SixthCharlotte, Collier, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Highlands, Lee, Orange, Osceola, PolkPresumed; policy language not addressedBensen, 401 So. 3d 390 (2023)
First29 panhandle and north-central countiesPresumed; policy language not addressedHomeowners Choice v. Clark, 410 So. 3d 99
FifthBrevard, Duval, Marion, Seminole, Volusia and nine othersPresumed; no published decision on policy languagen/a

Venue now decides the burden. Lee and Collier left the Second District for the new Sixth DCA on January 1, 2023,56 so Wild Oak Bay does not reach a Fort Myers or Naples loss. Nothing is final. As of publication no rehearing motion, jurisdictional notice, or mandate had been docketed, and the slip opinion remains subject to revision.1 The insured still lost step one, which is why when you put the carrier on notice decides more files than anything argued later.

Sources cited

  1. SFR Servs., LLC a/a/o Wild Oak Bay Owner Ass'n v. American Coastal Ins. Co., No. 2D2024-1947 (Fla. 2d DCA July 22, 2026)Florida Second District Court of Appeal via CourtListener
  2. Arce v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 388 So. 3d 205 (Fla. 3d DCA Jan. 3, 2024), No. 3D22-0722Florida Third District Court of Appeal via CourtListener
  3. Perez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 345 So. 3d 893 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 10, 2022), No. 4D21-2944Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal via CourtListener
  4. Arce v. Citizens, No. SC2024-0174 — review denied April 26, 2024 (Fla. Supreme Court docket)Florida Courts ACIS
  5. Fla. Stat. ch. 35 (2025) — appellate districts by judicial circuit, incl. § 35.044 (Sixth District)The Florida Senate
  6. Fla. Stat. § 26.021 (2025) — judicial circuits by countyThe Florida Senate

Built for where claims are going.

Carrier automation is not slowing down. claimOS gives the recovery side the same leverage: AI drafting grounded in the file, weather evidence on demand, and a record that holds up under review.