Under Florida law, How Does a Court Interpret Ambiguous Terms in an Insurance Policy?

“The law in Florida is that insurance coverage must be construed broadly and its exclusions narrowly.” Demshar v. AAACon Auto Transport, Inc., 337 So. 2d 963, 965 (Fla. 1976). “Under Florida law, if the relevant policy language is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation, one providing coverage and the other limiting coverage, the insurance policy is considered ambiguous.” Wash. Nat’l Ins. Corp. v. Ruderman, 117 So. 3d 943, 950 (Fla. 2013) (other citations and internal marks omitted). 

Florida law further provides that when “there is more than one reasonable interpretation of an insurance policy, …[the] ambiguity … should be construed against the insurer.” Malaube, LLC v. Greenwich Ins. Co., No. 20-22615-Civ, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156027, at *6-7 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 26, 2020) (other citations and marks omitted). Furthermore, in cases “[t]hat involve exclusions to insurance contracts, the rule is even clearer in favor of strict construction against the insurer: ‘exclusionary provisions which are ambiguous or otherwise susceptible to more than one meaning must be construed in favor of the insured.’” Sphinx Int’l, Inc. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co., 412 F.3d 1224, 1228 (11th Cir. 2005) (quoting State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Pridgen, 498 So. 2d 1245, 1248 (Fla. 1986)).

Joel Ewusiak frequently represents customers in disputes with insurance companies concerning the meaning of terms in life insurance policies. Please contact Joel for legal assistance with your specific matter.