CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal
...d have been read into the agency agreement, and the trial court erred in finding that it was inapplicable and dismissing Count I with prejudice. On the other hand, the trial court properly dismissed Count II with prejudice. Cycle Dealers relied upon section 626.9631, Florida Statutes (1977), [3] as its basis for bringing an action under the Unfair Insurance Trade Practices Act....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 29414
...The UITPA provides in pertinent part: Civil Liability. — The provisions of this part [Part VIII, UITPA] are cumulative to rights under the general civil and common law, and no action of the [Insurance] department shall abrogate such rights to damages or other relief in any court. Fla.Stat. § 626.9631 (1977)....
...In Cycle Dealers, an insurance company agent sued an insurance company principal alleging that a termination of agency agreement was in violation of the UITPA. The District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s dismissal with prejudice of that alleged cause of action. Quoting Fla.Stat. § 626.9631, supra, as the basis for its holding, the court stated [The UITPA] only intended to preserve those causes of action that a party had available to him prior to the enactment of that act....
...tat. §
626.9541(24)(c) (1977). Plaintiffs’ argument ignores the fact that the holding in Coira also cited Cycle Dealers as supporting precedent. It thus seems clear that both Florida courts which have considered the issue have relied on Fla.Stat. §
626.9631, supra....
...This Court is, of course, bound by the determination of state law by courts of that state. Hall v. Wainwright,
493 F.2d 37, 39 (5th Cir.1974). Accordingly, this Court holds that the UITPA affords the plaintiffs no cause of action. In an apparent attempt to avoid the force and effect of Fla.Stat. §
626.9631, plaintiffs argue that they are not asserting a new cause of action premised upon the UITPA....
...§
626.9541(24)(c) prohibited the defendant from cancelling the insurance policy due to the insured’s failure to place “collateral business.” Plaintiffs’ argument, however, ignores the fact that the entire UITPA was incorporated into the insurance contract, including Fla.Stat. §
626.9631 and the other provisions of the statute providing an administrative remedy only for violations thereof....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91838, 2016 WL 3554922
...§ 624.156 (8). Similarly, the provisions of the FUITPA “are cumulative to rights under the general civil and common law, and no action of the department, commission, or office shall abrogate such rights to damages or other relief in any court.” Fla. Stat. § 626.9631 ; see also Keehn v....
...Like Nevada insurance law, Florida insurance law is not “hermetically sealed,” as it does not preclude the pursuit of civil remedies available under other statutory or decisional state law. See Forsyth,
525 U.S. at 312 ,
119 S.Ct. 710 ; Fla. Stat. §§
624.155 (8),
626.9631....
