Bay Haven at Coco Bay Condominium Association, Inc. v. Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida grants Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest’s motion for summary judgment in a National Flood Insurance Program dispute arising from Hurricane Ian. The court holds that Bay Haven could not recover additional flood benefits because it failed to submit a signed and sworn proof of loss for the specific damages sought, and that invoices, estimates, appeal letters, and FEMA’s merits review did not satisfy or waive that requirement. The court therefore enters judgment for Hartford without reaching the separate timeliness issue concerning Building KK.

Holdings

1. An insured cannot recover under a Standard Flood Insurance Policy for additional damages unless it strictly complies with the requirement to submit a signed and sworn proof of loss within the applicable deadline or an expressly granted extension.
2. Invoices, estimates, appeal letters, and other evidence of loss are not the functional equivalent of the signed and sworn proof of loss required by the Standard Flood Insurance Policy.
3. A waiver of the proof-of-loss requirement must be express and in writing; FEMA's merits-based review of an appeal did not waive the requirement for additional damages.
4. Summary judgment for Hartford was proper because the undisputed record established that Bay Haven failed to satisfy the proof-of-loss condition precedent for every additional amount claimed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an insured under a Standard Flood Insurance Policy may recover additional federal flood benefits without submitting a signed and sworn proof of loss specifically stating the additional amounts claimed.
2. Whether invoices, estimates, appeal letters, and other claim documentation substantially comply with the federal proof-of-loss requirement.
3. Whether FEMA's merits-based review of an appeal or policyholder guidance waived or excused the proof-of-loss requirement.
4. Whether summary judgment should be granted on the undisputed record.

Disposition

other