Florida
Statutes of Limitations (FLORIDA)
​
Personal Injury - 4 yrs. [F.S.A. § 95.11(3)]
Wrongful Death - 2 yrs. [F.S.A. § 95.11(4)]
Med Mal - 2 yrs. from discovery, but no later than 4 yrs. from incident [F.S.A. § 95.11(4)]
Property Damage - 4 yrs. [F.S.A. § 95.11(3)]
Written Contracts - 5 yrs. [F.S.A. § 95.11(2)]
Oral Contracts - 4 yrs. [F.S.A. § 95.11(3)]
Contracts for Sale (goods) - No separate statute
Breach of Implied Warranty - 4 yrs. [F.S.A. § 95.11(3)]
Breach of Express Warranty - 5 yrs [F.S.A. § 95.11(2)]
Time within which an action shall be begun under any statute of limitations runs from the time when the last element constituting the cause of action occurs [F.S.A. § 95.031]
​
​
​
​
​
​
Statutes of Repose (FLORIDA)
​
Products - 12 yrs. for action involving products with expected useful life of 10 yrs. or less. All products except those listed in the statue are conclusively presumed to have expected useful life of 10 years or less. [F.S.A. § 95.031].
Construction of Real Property - 10 yrs. [F.S.A. 95.11(3)(c)]
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Claims Against Public/Gov. Entities (NOTE: “sovereign immunity” rules may apply) (FLORIDA)
​
Against All Entities - Claim must be presented within 3 yrs. (2 yrs. if Wrongful Death); Suit must be filed within 4 yrs. (2 yrs. if Wrongful Death or Med Mal) [F.S.A. § 768.28]. Denial of the claim is a condition precedent to maintaining an action; failure to make final disposition of a claim within 6 mos. (90 days if Wrongful Death or Med Mal) constitutes a final denial of the claim [F.S.A. § 768.28].
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Comparative Negligence (FLORIDA)
​
Pure comparative (Plaintiff can recover even if 99% at fault) [F.S.A. § 768.81].
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Made Whole Doctrine (MWD) (FLORIDA)
​
Recognized/applied. Insured is entitled to be made whole before subrogated Insurer could participate in the recovery from Tortfeasor [Insurance Co. of North America v. Lexus, 602 So.2d 528 (Fla. 1992)]. MWD can be modified by clear and/or specific contract language [Florida Farm Bureau Ins. Co. v. Martin, 377 So.2d 827 (Fla. App. 1979)]
​
It must be noted that that MWD is intended to protect recoveries obtained by Insured in limited fund scenarios [Schooner v. GEICO General Ins. Co., 903 So.2d 285 (Fla. App. 2005)]. Insurer does not violate MWD when it returns only a prorated portion of the deductible to Insured due to Insured’s comparative negligence [Monte de Orca v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 897 So.2d 471 (Fla. App 2004)].
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Economic Loss Doctrine (ELD) (Assuming No Injury to Person or Damage to “Other Property”) (FLORIDA)
​
ELD applies only in product liability cases and there are several exceptions, such as cases involving professional malpractice, fraudulent inducement, and negligent misrepresentation [Tiara Condominium Asps’, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., 110 So.3d 399 (Fla. 2013)]. In order to determine the character of the loss, one must look to the product purchased by Plaintiff and not the product sold by Defendant (the “product” purchased was the home with all of its component parts, including the seawall, pool, and patio) [Fishman v. Bold, 666 So.2d 273, (Fla. App. 1996)].
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Certificate/Affidavit Of Merit Requirements (Claims Against Licensed Professionals) (FLORIDA)
​
In Med Mal cases, the complaint must contain a certificate of counsel that reasonable investigation gave rise to a good faith belief that grounds exist for an action against each named Defendant (good faith may be shown to exist if the claimant or his counsel has received a written opinion of an expert that there appears to be evidence of medical negligence) [F.S.A. § 766.104]
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Landlord/Tenant Subrogation (FLORIDA)
​
Subrogation is, most likely, allowed (case-by-case analysis). Somewhat inconsistent law exists. In 1995, Court of Appeal applied the “Sutton Rule” holding that subrogation was not allowed [Continental Ins. Co. v. Kenner son, 661 So.2d 325 (Fla. App. 1995)]. Three years later, Court of Appeals (from a different district) held that subrogation against Tenant was allowed and held that the preceding case in fact relied on the lease provisions and the holding was “actually based on the application of the case-by-case analysis” [State Farm Florida Ins. Co. v. Loo, 27 So.3d 747 (Fla. App. 2010)].
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Reimbursement of Deductible(s) (FLORIDA)
​
No law available. Insurer does not violate MWD when it returns only a prorated portion of the deductible to Insured due to Insured's comparative negligence [Monte de Oca v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 897 So.2d 471 (Fla. App 2004)].
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
MedPay and PIP (FLORIDA)
​
MedPay - Subrogation allowed. PIP - No recovery allowed. Limited exception(s) allowing PIP subrogation exist - Insurers may have a right of reimbursement against the owner/insurer of a commercial vehicle, if PIP benefits paid result from Insured having been: (1) an occupant of the commercial vehicle; or (2) struck by the commercial vehicle while not an occupant of any vehicle [F.S.A. § 627.7405].
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Liability of Parents (FLORIDA)
​
Any negligence or willful misconduct of a minor driver is imputed to the person who signed the permit/license application [F.S.A. § 322.09]. Actual damages (unlimited) for malicious or willful acts [F.S.A. § 741.24].
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Joint Liability (FLORIDA)
​
Several liability (Plaintiff can recover from each Defendant only that Defendant’s share of fault), except for intentional and environmental torts [F.S.A. § 768.81]
​
​
​
​
​
​
Independent Cause of Action for Intentional or Negligent Evidence Spoliation (FLORIDA)
​
Tort of negligent spoliation against a first-party defendant has not been recognized [Martino v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 908 So.2d 342 (Fla. 2005)]. Independent claim for spoliation against third parties has been recognized [Townsend v. Conshor, Inc., 832 So.2d 166 (Fla. App. 2002)]
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Conflicts of Law (FLORIDA)
​
Torts - In an action for personal injury, the local law of the state where the injury occurred determines the rights/liabilities of the parties, unless, with respect to a particular issue, some other state has more significant relationship to the occurrence/parties [Bishop v. Florida Specialty Paint Co., 389 So.2d 999 (Fla. 1980)]. Contracts - In the absence of a contractual provision specifying governing law, a contract is governed by the law of the state in which the contract was made [Shaps v. Provident Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 826 So.2d 250 (Fla. 2002)]
​