Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

The Duty to Defend

By Mark Nation on June 8, 2015
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On June 4, 2015, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida issued an opinion discussing whether an insurance company had a duty to defend a construction defect claim brought against its insured.

The Insured was a contractor on a condominium project.  The condo owner sent the Insured a notice of claim under Florida Statute Section 558.004.  This notice is a prerequisite to pursuing a lawsuit against a contractor for construction defects.

The Insured submitted the 558 notice to its insurance company, and demanded that the insurer defend and indemnify the Insured against the claim.

Most insurance policies do not require an insurance company to defend claims.  Instead, most policies say that the insurance company “may” investigate and settle any claim; and “shall” or “will” or has the “duty” to defend any “suit.”  This insurance policy was no different.

Recognizing this, the Insured claimed that the Section 558 notice constituted a “suit” under the language of this particular policy.  This policy defined suit as a “civil proceeding.”

After a lengthy (and fascinating, to me) discussion reviewing the law from various jurisdictions, the District Court determined that a Section 558 notice was not a “civil proceeding,” and therefore was not a “suit.”  As a result, the insurance company had no duty to defend its insured against the condo owner’s claim.

The basic reasoning behind the Court’s decision is that the Section 558 framework is simply a way to encourage builders and owners to resolve a claim prior to resorting to litigation.  However, because there is no process, no set procedure, no outside decision maker or fact finder, and no requirement to resolve the case, it is not a “suit.”

A copy of the Court’s decision can be downloaded here:  Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster

One should not lose sight of the fact that the insurance company would still be required to defend any suit filed by the condo owner.  And, although it won this narrow issue, the insurance company still has a duty of good faith and fair dealing with regard to the Section 558 claim.  Thus, if the insurer refuses to settle the Section 558 claim it may later be on the hook for bad faith damages if there is a judgment in excess of the available policy limits.

Mark Nation

Photo of Mark Nation Mark Nation

Mark A. Nation is Board Certified in Civil Trial Law, and also in Business Litigation Law by the Florida Bar. Although there are about 100,000 attorneys in Florida, less than 100 hold these two Board Certifications

Read more about Mark NationEmail
  • Posted in:
    Insurance
  • Blog:
    Florida Insurance Blog
  • Organization:
    The Nation Law Firm

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo