The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XXXVII
INSURANCE

Chapter 627
INSURANCE RATES AND CONTRACTS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 627.727

¹627.727 Motor vehicle insurance; uninsured and underinsured vehicle coverage; insolvent insurer protection.—

(1) No motor vehicle liability insurance policy which provides bodily injury liability coverage shall be delivered or issued for delivery in this state with respect to any specifically insured or identified motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in this state unless uninsured motor vehicle coverage is provided therein or supplemental thereto for the protection of persons insured thereunder who are legally entitled to recover damages from owners or operators of uninsured motor vehicles because of bodily injury, sickness, or disease, including death, resulting therefrom. However, the coverage required under this section is not applicable when, or to the extent that, an insured named in the policy makes a written rejection of the coverage on behalf of all insureds under the policy. When a motor vehicle is leased for a period of 1 year or longer and the lessor of such vehicle, by the terms of the lease contract, provides liability coverage on the leased vehicle, the lessee of such vehicle shall have the sole privilege to reject uninsured motorist coverage or to select lower limits than the bodily injury liability limits, regardless of whether the lessor is qualified as a self-insurer pursuant to s. 324.171. Unless an insured, or lessee having the privilege of rejecting uninsured motorist coverage, requests such coverage or requests higher uninsured motorist limits in writing, the coverage or such higher uninsured motorist limits need not be provided in or supplemental to any other policy which renews, extends, changes, supersedes, or replaces an existing policy with the same bodily injury liability limits when an insured or lessee had rejected the coverage. When an insured or lessee has initially selected limits of uninsured motorist coverage lower than her or his bodily injury liability limits, higher limits of uninsured motorist coverage need not be provided in or supplemental to any other policy which renews, extends, changes, supersedes, or replaces an existing policy with the same bodily injury liability limits unless an insured requests higher uninsured motorist coverage in writing. The rejection or selection of lower limits shall be made on a form approved by the office. The form shall fully advise the applicant of the nature of the coverage and shall state that the coverage is equal to bodily injury liability limits unless lower limits are requested or the coverage is rejected. The heading of the form shall be in 12-point bold type and shall state: “You are electing not to purchase certain valuable coverage which protects you and your family or you are purchasing uninsured motorist limits less than your bodily injury liability limits when you sign this form. Please read carefully.” If this form is signed by a named insured, it will be conclusively presumed that there was an informed, knowing rejection of coverage or election of lower limits on behalf of all insureds. The insurer shall notify the named insured at least annually of her or his options as to the coverage required by this section. Such notice shall be part of, and attached to, the notice of premium, shall provide for a means to allow the insured to request such coverage, and shall be given in a manner approved by the office. Receipt of this notice does not constitute an affirmative waiver of the insured’s right to uninsured motorist coverage where the insured has not signed a selection or rejection form. The coverage described under this section shall be over and above, but shall not duplicate, the benefits available to an insured under any workers’ compensation law, personal injury protection benefits, disability benefits law, or similar law; under any automobile medical expense coverage; under any motor vehicle liability insurance coverage; or from the owner or operator of the uninsured motor vehicle or any other person or organization jointly or severally liable together with such owner or operator for the accident; and such coverage shall cover the difference, if any, between the sum of such benefits and the damages sustained, up to the maximum amount of such coverage provided under this section. The amount of coverage available under this section shall not be reduced by a setoff against any coverage, including liability insurance. Such coverage shall not inure directly or indirectly to the benefit of any workers’ compensation or disability benefits carrier or any person or organization qualifying as a self-insurer under any workers’ compensation or disability benefits law or similar law.

(2) The limits of uninsured motorist coverage shall be not less than the limits of bodily injury liability insurance purchased by the named insured, or such lower limit complying with the rating plan of the company as may be selected by the named insured. The limits set forth in this subsection, and the provisions of subsection (1) which require uninsured motorist coverage to be provided in every motor vehicle policy delivered or issued for delivery in this state, do not apply to any policy which does not provide primary liability insurance that includes coverage for liabilities arising from the maintenance, operation, or use of a specifically insured motor vehicle. However, an insurer issuing such a policy shall make available as a part of the application for such policy, and at the written request of an insured, limits up to the bodily injury liability limits contained in such policy or $1 million, whichever is less.

(3) For the purpose of this coverage, the term “uninsured motor vehicle” shall, subject to the terms and conditions of such coverage, be deemed to include an insured motor vehicle when the liability insurer thereof:

(a) Is unable to make payment with respect to the legal liability of its insured within the limits specified therein because of insolvency;

(b) Has provided limits of bodily injury liability for its insured which are less than the total damages sustained by the person legally entitled to recover damages; or

(c) Excludes liability coverage to a nonfamily member whose operation of an insured vehicle results in injuries to the named insured or to a relative of the named insured who is a member of the named insured’s household.

(4) An insurer’s insolvency protection shall be applicable only to accidents occurring during a policy period in which its insured’s uninsured motorist coverage is in effect when the liability insurer of the tortfeasor becomes insolvent within 4 years after such an accident. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to prevent any insurer from affording insolvency protection under terms and conditions more favorable to its insureds than is provided hereunder.

(5) Any person having a claim against an insolvent insurer as defined in s. 631.54 under this section shall present such claim for payment to the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association only. In the event of a payment to a person in settlement of a claim arising under this section, the association is not subrogated or entitled to recovery against the claimant’s insurer. The association, however, has the rights of recovery as set forth in chapter 631 in the proceeds recoverable from the assets of the insolvent insurer.

(6)(a) If an injured person or, in the case of death, the personal representative agrees to settle a claim with a liability insurer and its insured, and such settlement would not fully satisfy the claim for personal injuries or wrongful death so as to create an underinsured motorist claim, then written notice of the proposed settlement must be submitted by certified or registered mail to all underinsured motorist insurers that provide coverage. The underinsured motorist insurer then has a period of 30 days after receipt thereof to consider authorization of the settlement or retention of subrogation rights. If an underinsured motorist insurer authorizes settlement or fails to respond as required by paragraph (b) to the settlement request within the 30-day period, the injured party may proceed to execute a full release in favor of the underinsured motorist’s liability insurer and its insured and finalize the proposed settlement without prejudice to any underinsured motorist claim.

(b) If an underinsured motorist insurer chooses to preserve its subrogation rights by refusing permission to settle, the underinsured motorist insurer must, within 30 days after receipt of the notice of the proposed settlement, pay to the injured party the amount of the written offer from the underinsured motorist’s liability insurer. Thereafter, upon final resolution of the underinsured motorist claim, the underinsured motorist insurer is entitled to seek subrogation against the underinsured motorist and the liability insurer for the amounts paid to the injured party.

(c) The underinsured motorist insurer is entitled to a credit against total damages in the amount of the limits of the underinsured motorist’s liability policy in all cases to which this subsection applies, even if the settlement with the underinsured motorist under paragraph (a) or the payment by the underinsured motorist insurer under paragraph (b) is for less than the underinsured motorist’s full liability policy limits. The term “total damages” as used in this section means the full amount of damages determined to have been sustained by the injured party, regardless of the amount of underinsured motorist coverage. Nothing in this subsection, including any payment or credit under this subsection, reduces or affects the total amount of underinsured motorist coverage available to the injured party.

(7) The legal liability of an uninsured motorist coverage insurer does not include damages in tort for pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience unless the injury or disease is described in one or more of paragraphs (a)-(d) of s. 627.737(2).

(8) Insurers may offer policies of uninsured motorist coverage containing policy provisions, in language approved by the office, establishing that if the insured accepts this offer:

(a) The coverage provided as to two or more motor vehicles shall not be added together to determine the limit of insurance coverage available to an injured person for any one accident, except as provided in paragraph (c).

(b) If at the time of the accident the injured person is occupying a motor vehicle, the uninsured motorist coverage available to her or him is the coverage available as to that motor vehicle.

(c) If the injured person is occupying a motor vehicle which is not owned by her or him or by a family member residing with her or him, the injured person is entitled to the highest limits of uninsured motorist coverage afforded for any one vehicle as to which she or he is a named insured or insured family member. Such coverage shall be excess over the coverage on the vehicle the injured person is occupying.

(d) The uninsured motorist coverage provided by the policy does not apply to the named insured or family members residing in her or his household who are injured while occupying any vehicle owned by such insureds for which uninsured motorist coverage was not purchased.

(e) If, at the time of the accident the injured person is not occupying a motor vehicle, she or he is entitled to select any one limit of uninsured motorist coverage for any one vehicle afforded by a policy under which she or he is insured as a named insured or as an insured resident of the named insured’s household.

In connection with the offer authorized by this subsection, insurers shall inform the named insured, applicant, or lessee, on a form approved by the office, of the limitations imposed under this subsection and that such coverage is an alternative to coverage without such limitations. If this form is signed by a named insured, applicant, or lessee, it shall be conclusively presumed that there was an informed, knowing acceptance of such limitations on behalf of all insureds. When the named insured, applicant, or lessee has initially accepted such limitations, such acceptance shall apply to any policy which renews, extends, changes, supersedes, or replaces an existing policy unless the named insured requests deletion of such limitations and pays the appropriate premium for such coverage. Any insurer who provides coverage which includes the limitations provided in this subsection shall file revised premium rates with the office for such uninsured motorist coverage to take effect prior to initially providing such coverage. The revised rates shall reflect the anticipated reduction in loss costs attributable to such limitations but shall in any event reflect a reduction in the uninsured motorist coverage premium of at least 20 percent for policies with such limitations. Such filing shall not increase the rates for coverage which does not contain the limitations authorized by this subsection, and such rates shall remain in effect until the insurer demonstrates the need for a change in uninsured motorist rates pursuant to s. 627.0651.

(9) The damages recoverable from an uninsured motorist carrier in an action brought under s. 624.155 shall include the total amount of the claimant’s damages, including the amount in excess of the policy limits, any interest on unpaid benefits, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, and any damages caused by a violation of a law of this state. The total amount of the claimant’s damages is recoverable whether caused by an insurer or by a third-party tortfeasor.

History.—s. 1, ch. 61-175; s. 1, ch. 63-148; ss. 13, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 19, ch. 70-20; s. 1, ch. 71-88; s. 182, ch. 71-355; s. 20, ch. 71-970; ss. 3, 4, ch. 73-180; s. 165, ch. 73-333; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 3, ch. 76-266; s. 1, ch. 77-457; s. 30, ch. 77-468; s. 1, ch. 78-374; s. 113, ch. 79-40; ss. 2, 3, ch. 79-241; ss. 1, 2, ch. 80-396; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 544, 563, 809(2nd), ch. 82-243; ss. 66, 79, ch. 82-386; s. 1, ch. 84-41; s. 16, ch. 85-62; s. 7, ch. 86-182; s. 1, ch. 87-213; s. 15, ch. 88-370; s. 2, ch. 89-238; s. 1, ch. 89-243; s. 39, ch. 90-119; ss. 79, 114, ch. 92-318; s. 358, ch. 97-102; s. 1190, ch. 2003-261; s. 30, ch. 2006-12; s. 1, ch. 2013-195; s. 4, ch. 2015-65; s. 21, ch. 2023-15.

¹Note.—

A. Section 29, ch. 2023-15, provides that “[t]his act shall not be construed to impair any right under an insurance contract in effect on or before [March 24, 2023]. To the extent that this act affects a right under an insurance contract, this act applies to an insurance contract issued or renewed after [March 24, 2023].”

B. Section 30, ch. 2023-15, provides that “[e]xcept as otherwise expressly provided in this act, this act shall apply to causes of action filed after [March 24, 2023].”

F.S. 627.727 on Google Scholar

F.S. 627.727 on Casetext

Amendments to 627.727

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 627.727

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 627.727.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

WOPSHALL, v. TRAVELERS HOME MARINE INS. CO., 369 F. Supp. 3d 1283 (S.D. Fla. 2019)

. . . See § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat., and Neff v. Prop. & Cas. Ins. . . .

BHASKER, v. KEMPER CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, 361 F. Supp. 3d 1045 (D.N.M. 2019)

. . . . § 627.727(1) (1983) ; Tex. Ins. . . .

BERMAN, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, 359 F. Supp. 3d 1158 (M.D. Fla. 2019)

. . . Florida Statutes section 627.727(1) requires insurance policies providing bodily injury coverage to also . . . Section 627.727(1) also reads that "[t]he rejection or selection of lower limits [of UM coverage] shall . . . Stat. § 627.727(1). . . . More importantly, Defendant's construction contradicts the plain language of section 627.727(1). . . . Co., 420 So.2d 1086, 1088 (Fla. 1982) (holding that section 627.727(1) requires UM coverage absent a . . .

ECKOLS, v. CENTURY CENTENNIAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 260 So. 3d 1123 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Section 627.727(9)(d), Florida Statutes (2012), provides that insurers may offer policies for UM coverage . . . However, while insurers are not allowed to provide less UM coverage than required by section 627.727, . . .

STATE FARM AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. LYDE,, 267 So. 3d 453 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . erred in disregarding an exclusion for UM coverage under the mother's policy authorized under section 627.727 . . . Rather, as provided by section 627.727(9) and the Selection/Rejection Form, that provision applies when . . . Thus, State Farm asserted, consistently with section 627.727(9)(b), the UM coverage exclusion under 2 . . . The daughter argued further that exclusion 2.a. was not consistent with 627.727(9) and was therefore . . . See § 627.727(9) ; see also Swan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. . . .

GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY GEICO v. PEREZ, 260 So. 3d 342 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . While section 627.727(9)(d) of the Florida Statutes (2013) does allow an insurer to offer automobile . . . Section 627.727(1) sets forth four independent requirements that a UM rejection form must meet before . . . Cox, 681 So.2d 760, 761 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) ; § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (2013). . . . See § 627.727(9)(d), Fla. Stat. (2013) ; GEICO v. Douglas, 654 So.2d 118, 120 (Fla. 1995). . . . Those cases, however, concerned application of section 627.727(9) which, unlike section 627.727(1), does . . .

H. JERVIS v. CASTANEDA GEICO, 243 So. 3d 996 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . an insurance company that completely fails to comply with the written notice provisions of section 627.727 . . . Section 627.727, Florida Statutes, lays certain ground rules for UM coverage. . . . In section 627.727, the legislature made plain its desire that insureds make "informed" and "knowing" . . . decisions about UM coverage. § 627.727(1), (9), Fla. . . . As Geico correctly points out, the 2010 version of section 627.727 applies here. See Hassen v. . . .

AMICA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. WILLIS,, 235 So. 3d 1041 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

. . . Section 627.727(1) states that “[n]o motor vehicle liability insurance policy which provides bodily injury . . . not be less than the limits of bodily injury liability insurance purchased by the named insured.” § 627.727 . . . apply and protect the insured unless the insured rejects them or selects lower limits in writing. § 627.727 . . . Section 627.727(9) sets forth several limitations that may be included in UM policy provisions., “An . . . However, section 627.727(9) does not provide for the exclusion of particular uninsured vehicles. . . .

LENTINI, E. Jr. v. AMERICAN SOUTHERN HOME INSURANCE COMPANY,, 233 So. 3d 1258 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . The trial court opined that Martin appeared to conflict with section 627.727 but concluded that it was . . . See id. § 627.727(9)(a)-(e). . . . Id. § 627.727(1), (9). . . . Id. § 627.727(1), (9). . . . Mullís was decided before section 627.0851 was renumbered as section 627.727. See § 627.0851, Fla. . . .

SCHOECK, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 235 So. 3d 953 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . See § 627.727(9)(c), Fla, Stat. (2015). . . . Schoeck moved for reconsideration, urging that section 627.727(9)(c) only limits UM recovery to the highest . . . First, section 627.727(9)(c) authorizes an insurer to offer a policy restricting an insured’s maximum . . . Section 627.727(9)(c) does not provide that insurers may credit their excess UM benefits with a primary . . .

WRUBEL, v. SAFECO INSURANCE CO. OF ILLINOIS,, 266 F. Supp. 3d 1372 (S.D. Fla. 2017)

. . . . §§ 627.727(10) and 627.428. [Id. ¶¶23, 25]. . . .

BOTTINI, v. GEICO,, 859 F.3d 987 (11th Cir. 2017)

. . . . § 627.727. After Mr. . . . Stat. § 627.727(10), to the full amount of damages designated by the jury in the UM breach-of-contract . . . Florida courts thereafter acknowledged that § 627.727(10) “clearly and unambiguously reflects the legislative . . . Stat. § 627.727(10). . . .

ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, a v. CERNOGORSKY,, 211 So. 3d 1119 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . to him because The Green Companies had failed to execute a UM coverage waiver as required by section 627.727 . . . (1), but by section 627.727(2) of the Florida Statutes which does not require a written rejection of . . . Rather, and as section 627.727(2) of the Florida Statutes confirms, “[t]he provisions of subsection ( . . . Co., 49 So.3d 810, 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (“A key amendment to section 627.727 occurred in 1984, when . . . The coverage provided by the Zurich policy was excess coverage not governed by section 627.727(1) which . . .

GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. A. DIXON,, 209 So. 3d 77 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . See §§ 627.727, 627.737, Fla. . . .

Y. WITHERUP, C. v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 214 F. Supp. 3d 1272 (M.D. Fla. 2016)

. . . . § 627.727(1). . . . Stat. § 627.727(1). . . . Stat. § 627.727(1). . . . Stat. § 627.727(1). . . . Stat. § 627.727(1) (emphasis added). . . . .

CATHERINE S. CADLE, v. GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 838 F.3d 1113 (11th Cir. 2016)

. . . [of Florida Statutes § 627.727(7) ].” PL’s Tr. Ex. 8A. Cadle rejected GEICO’s offer. . . . Cadle, which leaves a questionable threshold breach [of § 627.727(7) ].” Pl.’s Tr. Ex. 10A at 1. . . . Stat., § 627.727(10)). . . . Stat. § 627.727(3)(b)). . Cadle had cervical spine surgery to stabilize her neck in 1989. . . . Stat. § 627.727(10)). . . . .

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. SMITH,, 198 So. 3d 852 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . impermissibly limits the uninsured motorist coverage “State Farm was required to provide under section 627.727 . . . Determining whether a policy provision expends less coverage than required by section 627.727 begins . . . In addition, section 627.727(3)(c) identifies three circumstances in -which an insured motor vehicle . . . Section 627.727 does not define those terms. . . . A long line of cases makes clear, however, that a vehicle is deemed insured under section 627.727 where . . . result is inequitable and flies in the face of the purpose of UM insurance as set forth in section 627.727 . . . The overarching purpose of section 627.727 is to ensure coverage for certain class I insureds who are . . . The legislature announced this purpose in subsection 627.727(1), which mandates that insurers must provide . . . It is true that section 627.727 does not squarely address the unique facts of this case. . . . But subsection 627.727(3)(c) does address an analogous factual scenario: (3) For the purpose of this . . .

COCCARO, v. GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 648 F. App'x 876 (11th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 627.727, governing the selection or knowing rejection of uninsured motorist coverage (“UM coverage . . . Stat. § 627.727(1). . . . While the form now complies with § 627.727, the Cocearos claimed “the www.geico.com website still is . . . Stat. § 627.727(1) (“When an insured or lessee has initially selected limits of uninsured motorist coverage . . . As Florida courts have held, the purpose of § 627.727(1) “was to ease the burden placed on insurance . . .

FRIDMAN, v. SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS,, 185 So. 3d 1214 (Fla. 2016)

. . . claim against Safeco,” because “Fridman can seek the full measure of damages afforded by- [section 627.727 . . . Just months after this Court issued its opinion in McLeod, the Legislature enacted section 627.727(10 . . . See § 627.727(10), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . . See § 627.727(10), Fla. Stat. II. Intertwined Nature of UM Verdict & First-Party Bad Faith Action . . . . This Court noted that if section 627.727(10) had been applicable ⅛ that case, “under the retroactive . . .

COUSIN, v. GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 166 F. Supp. 3d 1290 (M.D. Fla. 2015)

. . . . § 627.727(10)). . . . Section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes, provides that uninsured motorist coverage "is provided ... for . . .

R. BATCHELOR, v. GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY,, 142 F. Supp. 3d 1220 (M.D. Fla. 2015)

. . . Pursuant to Florida Statutes, § 627.727(1), Geico was required to offer uninsured motorist benefits ( . . . Stat. § 627.727(6)(c). . . . Stat., § 627.727(10) (emphasis added); see also id. § 627.727(6); Macola v. Gov't Emps. Ins. . . . Stat. § 627.727(10). . . . . Stat. § 627.727(6)(b). . Thagard also handled Batchelor’s claim for UM Benefits for the. . . .

RUSSELL, P. S. S. IV, v. McGRATH M., 135 F. Supp. 3d 427 (D.S.C. 2015)

. . . See § 627.727 FLA. STATUTE; Tobin v. Michigan Mut. Ins. . . .

HARRIS, v. GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 619 F. App'x 896 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . . § 627.727(10). . . .

M. GILBERT, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 95 F. Supp. 3d 1358 (M.D. Fla. 2015)

. . . However, Section 627.727(8) states that “[t]he provisions of s. 627.428 do not apply to any action brought . . . Id. § 627.727(8). . . .

WIGGINS, v. ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,, 94 F. Supp. 3d 1276 (S.D. Fla. 2015)

. . . . §§ 627.727(7) & 627.737(2)(a)-(d). . . .

CHASE, v. HORACE MANN INSURANCE COMPANY,, 158 So. 3d 514 (Fla. 2015)

. . . as the named insured on that policy for the first time, creates a new policy for purposes of section 627.727 . . . liability limits and to obtain a written waiver of those benefits before reducing them under section 627.727 . . . Harrington, 86 So.3d 1274, 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (holding that under § 627.727(9), unlike subsection . . . New Policy The policy in question is a new policy for purposes of section 627.727(9), Florida Statutes . . . Id. at 208 n. 4 (citing § 627.727(1) (Supp. 1982)). . . .

ECHO, v. MGA INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., 157 So. 3d 507 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . . § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (2002). . . .

GERMANY v. DARBY a, 157 So. 3d 521 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . They argued that Florida law, § 627.727(1), Florida Statutes, didn’t allow the policy to have different . . . Turning to the text of § 627.727(1), the statute says that no motor vehicle liability insurance policy . . . The Germanys advocate a different construction of § 627.727(1) based on Varro v. Federated Mut. . . . In Varro, the Second District concluded that § 627.727(1) “does not allow rejection of UM coverage on . . . Thus, nothing on the face of § 627.727, or as a policy matter, forbids Hinson Oil’s UM coverage elections . . .

HAMPTON v. FLORIDA MUNICIPAL INSURANCE TRUST,, 152 So. 3d 855 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . See § 627.727(2), Fla. Stat (2011). . . . As an excess policy, FMIT’s obligation under section 627.727(2), Florida Statutes (2011), was to offer . . .

TRAVELERS COMMERCIAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. HARRINGTON,, 154 So. 3d 1106 (Fla. 2014)

. . . WHETHER THE FAMILY VEHICLE EXCLUSION FOR UNINSURED MOTORIST BENEFITS CONFLICTS WITH SECTION 627.727(3 . . . See generally § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (2009). . . . However, in 1973, the Legislature created subsection 627.727(3)(b) (originally subsection 627.727(2)( . . . See generally § 627.727(9), Fla. Stat. (2009). . . . (9) from that found in section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes (2009). . . .

GIANASSI, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 60 F. Supp. 3d 1267 (M.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . . § 627.727(10). . . .

GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. PATON,, 150 So. 3d 804 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . In 1992, the Legislature passed section 627.727(10), which provides: The damages recoverable from an . . . Applying section 627.727(10), Laforet reiterated that the initial action for first-party benefits, which . . . accident, determines the extent of the plaintiffs damages in a first party bad faith case: Section 627.727 . . .

KING, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY,, 579 F. App'x 796 (11th Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 627.727(10), “damages in first-party bad faith actions are to include the total amount of a claimant . . . As described by the Florida Supreme Court in Laforet, the purpose of § 627.727(10), which was enacted . . . King contends that the legislative purpose in enacting § 627.727(10) was to make the excess verdict in . . . Stat. § 627.727(10). . . . The first requested instruction concerned recoverable damages under § 627.727(10). . . .

DREW, v. SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS,, 578 F. App'x 954 (11th Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 627.727(3)(c). . . . “Section § 627.727(3)(c) ... provides that where a nonfamily permissive user is driving an insured vehicle . . .

GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY, v. BARBER,, 147 So. 3d 109 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Section 627.727(10), Florida Statutes (2008), specifically provides that the damages recoverable in an . . . At the time this suit was filed, section 627.727(10) had not been enacted. . . . On the same day the verdict was returned, section 627.727(10) became effective, so the insured filed . . . Thus, the court in La-foret made it clear that application of section 627.727(10) requires that, in a . . . Burger, 712 So.2d 389, 392 (Fla.1998) (“That legislation [section 627.727(10) ] merely overturned the . . .

BRANNAN, v. GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY,, 569 F. App'x 724 (11th Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 627.727(9); Swan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. . . . Stat. § 627.727(9)(e) (requiring that “nonstacked” UM coverage premiums be discounted by at least 20 . . . When the insured purchases stacked coverage, the limitations of section 627.727(9)(a)-(e) do not apply . . . Stat. § 627.727(1) (requiring that UM coverage be applicable to all, unless “an insured named in the . . . Stat. § 627.727(9)(e); see also Mitleider v. . . .

WAPNICK, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 134 So. 3d 968 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . . §§ 627.428 and 627.727(8).” . . . Section 627.727(8) states that “[t]he provisions of s. 627.428 do not apply to any action brought pursuant . . . whether the policy provides coverage for an uninsured motorist proven to be liable for the accident.” § 627.727 . . . Section 627.727(8) and its limitation on recovery under section 627.428 were not discussed by either . . .

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. CURRAN,, 135 So. 3d 1071 (Fla. 2014)

. . . See § 627.727, Fla. Stat. (2007). . . . ANALYSIS Pursuant to section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes (2007), insurers issuing motor vehicle policies . . . injury liability limits than the damages sustained by the person legally entitled to recover damages. § 627.727 . . . Indeed, section 627.727 was intended to place the injured party in the same position as he or she would . . . See § 627.727(6)(a), Fla. . . .

SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, v. RADER, Jr., 132 So. 3d 941 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . which if there is such a claim, must be litigated as a separate suit on damages as contemplated by § 627.727 . . .

A. MANFREDI, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 550 F. App'x 718 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 627.727(9); Swan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. . . . Stat. § 627.727(9)(e) (requiring that “non-stacked” UM coverage premiums be discounted by at least 20 . . . Stat. 627.727(9)(b) (“If at the time of the accident, the injured person is occupying a motor vehicle . . .

NEFF, v. PROPERTY CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, a, 133 So. 3d 530 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . Section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes (2009), describes UM coverage and provides in relevant part: The . . . are less than the total damages sustained by the person legally entitled to recover damages .... § 627.727 . . .

MACCHIONE, v. STATE, 123 So. 3d 114 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . title to chapter 92-318, which reads in pertinent part “[a]n act relating to insurance; ... amending s. 627.727 . . .

HORACE MANN INSURANCE COMPANY, v. CHASE, Co-, 121 So. 3d 1191 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . First, section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes (2008), which applies to UM coverage, provides that UM coverage . . . Second, section 627.727(9), Florida Statutes (2008), which applies to stacking UM coverage, states, “ . . . Section 627.727(9)(d), Florida Statutes (2008), provides that an insurance company may exclude coverage . . .

BOLLINGER, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 538 F. App'x 857 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . claim against State Farm; and (2) a claim for attorney’s fees under Florida Statutes §§ 624.155 and 627.727 . . . The second amended complaint also included a demand for attorney’s fees under Florida Statute § 627.727 . . .

HARRIS, v. GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 961 F. Supp. 2d 1223 (S.D. Fla. 2013)

. . . . § 627.727(7) provides that “the legal liability of an uninsured motorist coverage insurer does not . . . Stat. § 627.727(10): The damages recoverable from [a UM] carrier in an action brought under § 624.155 . . .

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. SIERGIEJ,, 116 So. 3d 523 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . See § 627.727(6)(c), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . Following the dictates of section 627.727(6), Mr. . . . See § 627.727(3)(b). . . . Reading section 627.727(3) in pari materia with section 627.727(1) leads to a logical and harmonious . . . Under section 627.727(1), Mr. . . .

SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, v. FRIDMAN,, 117 So. 3d 16 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . of Civil Remedy filed by Fridman; the pleadings filed in this case; and the provisions of sections 627.727 . . . The trial court denied Safeco’s motion to confess judgment, reasoning that under section 627.727(10), . . . The Bad Faith Claim: The Civil Remedy Notice and Sections 624.155 and 627.727(10), Florida Statutes The . . . The majority has also misread the provisions of section 627.727. . . . That statute specifically allows for the recovery of damages in excess of policy limits. § 627.727(10 . . . Safeco’s motion finding that to do otherwise “would ignore the plain legislative intent of section 627.727 . . . the trial court, the entry of a confessed judgment would not ignore the legislative intent of section 627.727 . . . only to the extent that those cases could be read as approving the retroactive application of section 627.727 . . .

TARA WOODS SPE, LLC, v. CASHIN,, 116 So. 3d 492 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . . § 627.727(1), Fla. . . .

GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. BOTTINI,, 93 So. 3d 476 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Section 627.727(10), Florida Statutes (2006), states: The damages recoverable from an uninsured motorist . . . problem presented by this case appears unique to bad faith claims arising from coverage under section 627.727 . . .

TRAVELERS COMMERCIAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. HARRINGTON,, 86 So. 3d 1274 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . The trial court determined that the under-insured provision in section 627.727(3)(b) applies and that . . . the family vehicle exclusion in the Travelers policy conflicts with section 627.727(3)(b) and (c). . . . The trial court’s interpretation of section 627.727(3) accords with the supreme court’s pronouncements . . . with section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes. . . . In light of the differing language describing the section 627.727(1) and (9) waivers, the trial court . . .

HIGGINS P. v. WEST BEND MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 85 So. 3d 1156 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . limits, the Hig-ginses filed a bad faith action against West Bend, pursuant to sections 624.155 and 627.727 . . .

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. E. BOWLING, 81 So. 3d 538 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Bowling was required to prove under section 627.727, Florida Statutes (2004), that the damages in his . . . extent of the plaintiffs injuries sustained in the accident that are typically raised under section 627.727 . . .

LEWIS, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 450 F. App'x 806 (11th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 627.727; Jackson v. State Farm, Fire and Cas. Co., 469 So.2d 191, 193 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). . . .

SOMMERVILLE, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 65 So. 3d 558 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . In enacting the UM statute, section 627.727, the legislature intended “to provide for the broad protection . . . Section 627.727(9)(a)-(e) allows insurers to offer policies limiting UM coverage. . . . We observed that limitations on UM coverage under section 627.727(9) “do not include a provision that . . . We held that “[ujnder section 627.727(1), an insured may reject UM coverage ‘on behalf of all insureds . . . vehicles, but section 627.727(1) does not provide for rejection of UM coverage for only some vehicles . . .

LEWIS, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 789 F. Supp. 2d 1289 (S.D. Fla. 2011)

. . . . § 627.727. . . .

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, v. KING, 68 So. 3d 267 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . The damages in a bad faith action involving underinsured motorist coverage are specified in section 627.727 . . . language of that statute, an issue we do not decide today, those damages are awardable under section 627.727 . . . Section 627.727(10) provides: The damages recoverable from an uninsured motorist carrier in an action . . .

SWAN Sr. v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 60 So. 3d 514 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . The Swans therefore received stacked UM coverage in the Honda policy as required by section 627.727 of . . . Section 627.727(1) mandates that insurers offer UM coverage in all automobile insurance policies. . . . . § 627.727(1), (9) Fla. Stat. (2010). . . . See § 627.727(9)(a)-(e), Fla. Stat. (2010). . . . When the insured purchases stacked coverage, the limitations of section 627.727(9)(a)-(e) do not apply . . .

M. BESSMAN v. TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA,, 773 F. Supp. 2d 1270 (N.D. Fla. 2011)

. . . . § 627.727. . . . Florida Statute § 627.727 requires that any automobile liability insurance policy issued in Florida covering . . . the named insured; met the content and format requirements for a UM/UIM selection form specified in § 627.727 . . .

BEDOYA, v. TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY CO. OF AMERICA,, 773 F. Supp. 2d 1326 (M.D. Fla. 2011)

. . . Wilson, Magistrate Judge for the Middle District of Florida, applied Florida law to interpret section 627.727 . . . However, in specifically applying § 627.727 [Florida’s uninsured motorist statute] Florida law applies . . . Section 627.727(1), Florida’s UM statute, states in pertinent part, as follows: ... . . . Section 627.727 does not contemplate or require that the insurer obtain a new UM selection form every . . .

MITLEIDER, v. BRIER GRIEVES AGENCY, INC. f k a, 53 So. 3d 410 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . We find that it does, since section 627.727(9), Florida Statutes (2007), creates a conclusive presumption . . . reversed its ruling after determining that the Adams case was based on an earlier version of section 627.727 . . . Section 627.727(1) requires that uninsured motorist coverage be applicable to all, unless “an insured . . . the policy makes a written rejection of the coverage on behalf of all insureds under the policy.” § 627.727 . . . Co., 516 So.2d 1024, 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (discussing the 1984 amendment to section 627.727). . . .

CONTRERAS, v. CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY,, 53 So. 3d 1194 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . Section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes (2007), provides in pertinent part: No motor vehicle liability insurance . . . With respect to the written rejection of UM coverage, section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes (2007) further . . .

SOUTHERN- OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, v. HAYDEN, JPH INC. a, 413 F. App'x 187 (11th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 627.727. . . .

SIMMONS, v. STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY,, 55 So. 3d 636 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . also argues State Farm was required to obtain a rejection of UM stacking coverage pursuant to section 627.727 . . . There is no question that section 627.727(9) would apply to this policy if it was a stacking-type policy . . . Since we have ruled this is not a stacking policy, section 627.727(9) is not applicable here. . . .

GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. CIRILLO- MEIJER,, 50 So. 3d 681 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Set-Off Section 627.727, Florida Statutes, authorizes an injured party to settle with the other driver . . . been sustained by the injured party, regardless of the amount of underin-sured motorist coverage.” § 627.727 . . .

G. SARIS, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, M. Of, 49 So. 3d 815 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . that the policy provision is void against the public policy of the uninsured motorist statute, section 627.727 . . . the provision at issue is void against the public policy of the uninsured motorist statute, section 627.727 . . . issued for delivery in this state ... unless uninsured motor vehicle coverage is provided therein.... § 627.727 . . . We, therefore, conclude that the provision is against the public policy of the UM statute, section 627.727 . . .

NIEVES, v. NORTH RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY,, 49 So. 3d 810 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . The issue presented in this case is whether an excess insurer has satisfied the terms of section 627.727 . . . North River argued section 627.727(2)’s requirement that coverage be made available to policyholders . . . The dispute in this case centers around section 627.727(2)’s requirement that an excess insurer “shall . . . Section 627.727, Florida Statutes (2006), provides that every automobile liability policy provide UM/ . . . As a remedial statute, section 627.727 is to be broadly and liberally construed. Ferrigno v. . . .

FRANKLIN, v. PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 44 So. 3d 1281 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Co., 34 So.3d 81, 82 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (“We do not read the plain language of section 627.727(1) to . . .

RANDO, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY,, 611 F.3d 765 (11th Cir. 2010)

. . . Employees Insurance Company (GEICO), failed to satisfy the informed consent requirement of section 627.727 . . .

R. MENENDEZ, Jr. v. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE CO. INC., 35 So. 3d 873 (Fla. 2010)

. . . In Laforet, this Court held that section 627.727(10), Florida Statutes, which imposed a penalty on insurers . . . take additional steps beyond filing an application for PIP benefits and beyond complying with section 627.727 . . . may not have access to and which may not be sent until the claim is considered overdue under section 627.727 . . .

RANDO, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY,, 39 So. 3d 244 (Fla. 2010)

. . . Because I conclude that the provisions of section 627.727(9), Florida Statutes (2005), have no application . . . motor vehicles that are not “registered or principally garaged in the state,” as provided in section 627.727 . . . Based on statutory context and history, subsection (9) of section 627.727 is most reasonably understood . . . In short, the text of section 627.727 does not require that the conditions in subsection (9) be applied . . . Employees Insurance Company (GEICO), failed to satisfy the informed consent requirement of section 627.727 . . . Limitations on Anti-Stacking Provisions in Florida In 1987, section 627.727, Florida Statutes, which . . . This amendment resulted in the creation of section 627.727(9), Florida Statutes (1987). . . . However, section 627.727(9) also places limitations on how an insurer may restrict uninsured motorist . . . The language “registered or principally garaged” is derived from section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes . . . but only if the anti-stacking provision in a policy controlled by Florida law complies with section 627.727 . . . AUTOMOBILE POLICY ALSO ISSUED BY THE INSURER TO THE NAMED INSUREDS IN FLORIDA, WITHOUT SATISFYING SECTION 627.727 . . . Because Florida law applies, I agree with the majority’s analysis and application of section 627.727( . . .

A. WOLF, G. Jr. v. PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 34 So. 3d 81 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . At issue is whether section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes (2006), required Progressive American Insurance . . . Under section 627.727(1), vehicle liability insurance policies must include UM coverage unless the named . . . allow the insured to request such coverage, and shall be given in a manner approved by the office. § 627.727 . . . We do not read the plain language of section 627.727(1) to require that notice of UM coverage availability . . . ., Inc., 793 So.2d 99, 100 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (referring to the “annual notice” required by section 627.727 . . .

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. JENKINS,, 32 So. 3d 163 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . See §§ 624.155; 627.727(10), Fla. Stat. (2005). . . .

WORKMEN S AUTO INSURANCE COMPANY, v. FRANZ, 24 So. 3d 638 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . See § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). In count II, Mr. . . .

BUENO, v. WORKMAN,, 20 So. 3d 993 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . See § 627.727(1), Fla. . . .

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. N. DUCKWORTH, E., 660 F. Supp. 2d 1323 (M.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . . § 627.727(9) (2006). (Id.) . . . Stat. § 627.727(9). . . . Stat. § 627.727(1). . . . excess carrier has a duty to make available the uninsured motorists (UM) coverage required by section 627.727 . . . Stat. § 627.727(1)). . . .

PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, a v. GREGORY, INC. a d b a USI a, 16 So. 3d 979 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Section 627.727 of the Florida Statutes expressly provides that no motor vehicle policy for bodily injury . . . applicable when, or to the extent that, an insured ... makes a written rejection of the coverage.... § 627.727 . . .

MALDONADO, v. FIRST LIBERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION,, 342 F. App'x 485 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 627.727. A. . . .

DIAZ- HERNANDEZ, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY,, 19 So. 3d 996 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . the known uninsured motorist and State Farm, is against the public policy of the UM statute, section 627.727 . . . IV.Analysis Pursuant to section 627.727(1), every motor vehicle liability insurer doing business in this . . . Section 627.727(1) provides in relevant part: No motor vehicle liability insurance policy which provides . . . (citing § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (2002)); Foremost Ins. Co. v. . . . We, therefore, conclude that the provision is against the public policy of the UM statute, section 627.727 . . .

A. JOHNSON, M. v. GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 318 F. App'x 847 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 627.727, Insureds argue that Geico’s tender of the UM coverage necessarily meant that Geico had determined—as . . .

PAWTUCKET MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, L. v. MANGANELLI, 3 So. 3d 421 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Section 627.727(8), Florida Statutes, was intended to preclude attorney’s fees when an insured and the . . . Following arbitration, Manganelli moved for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to sections 627.428 and 627.727 . . . Section 627.727(8), Florida Statutes, provides that attorney’s fees shall not be awarded under section . . .

RANDO, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY,, 556 F.3d 1173 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . Section 627.0851 was later re-codified at Florida Statutes § 627.727. . . . Section 627.727 In 1987, the Florida legislature amended Florida Statutes § 627.727 (the successor to . . . Stat. § 627.727(1) (emphasis added). . . . However, the amendment added subsection 9 to § 627.727, which allows policies to prohibit stacking if . . . Stat. § 627.727(9). . . .

METROPOLITAN CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, v. TEPPER,, 2 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 2009)

. . . The last sentence of section 627.727(6)(b) specifically provides that a UM insurer is entitled to seek . . . To support its argument, Dominion cited section 627.727(6)(b)’s statement that “[thereafter, upon final . . . The Second District explained its interpretation of section 627.727(6)(b), stating: In our view, the . . . This Court is now presented with these conflicting interpretations of section 627.727 on discretionary . . . The critical terms in the pertinent portion of section 627.727(6)(b) are “upon” and “entitled.” . . . (6)(b) was made, and the trial court never reached the merits of the meaning of section 627.727(6)(b) . . . It is the second issue, the interpretation of section 627.727(6)(b), that is before this Court and the . . . This second argument, interpreting section 627.727(6)(b), is contrary to the argument Metropolitan made . . . The plain meaning of the emphasized text [from section 627.727(6)(b) ] is that an insurer may not seek . . . In reviewing the last sentence of section 627.727(6)(b), the Second District stated that “it does not . . .

O BRIEN, M. O v. STATE FARM FIRE CASUALTY CO. a a, 999 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . (2), but not section 627.727(1)); Tres v. . . . See § 627.727(2), Fla. . . . On the other hand, section 627.727(2) does not contain the same requirements. . . . ]” an existing policy. § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (2008). . . . Please read carefully." § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . .

LINER, v. WORKERS TEMPORARY STAFFING, INC., 990 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 2008)

. . . Laforet, 658 So.2d 55 (Fla.1995), we held that section 627.727(10), Florida Statutes (Supp.1992), was . . . This Court reasoned that section 627.727(10) was penal in nature because this statute provided the insured . . . Section 627.727(10) enabled a first-party insured to collect excess damages caused by an insurer’s bad . . . Similar to section 627.727(10), section 448.24(l)(b) enables the aggrieved party to collect a significantly . . .

MCI WORLDCOM NETWORK SERVICES, INC. v. MASTEC, INC., 995 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 2008)

. . . Co., 591 So.2d 621 (Fla.1992), superseded on other grounds by § 627.727(10), Fla. Stat. . . .

MUTH, v. AIU INSURANCE COMPANY,, 982 So. 2d 749 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . tortfeasors and released her without first notifying AIU and obtaining AIU’s consent, contrary to section 627.727 . . . Karen Somma, without providing notice and seeking AIU’s permission to settle, as required by section 627.727 . . . consent prior to entering into the settlement agreement and executing a release, as required by section 627.727 . . . Section 627.727(6)(a), Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part: If an injured person ... agrees . . .

MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY OF FLORIDA, v. SHERWIN, 982 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . In addition, subsection 627.727(9)(e), Florida Statutes (2003), allows the insurer to provide the insured . . .

PERAZA, v. ROBLES,, 983 So. 2d 1189 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . . § 627.727(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2005). . . .

FLORIDA HOSPITAL WATERMAN, INC. v. M. BUSTER, v., 984 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 2008)

. . . 658 So.2d 55, 61 (Fla.1995) (finding that even though the Legislature expressly stated that section 627.727 . . .

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. L. SHAW D. a k a D., 967 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . liability limits after his former wife elected lower limits of $50,000 per person, pursuant to section 627.727 . . . This restriction for UM coverage arose from section 627.727(9)(d), Florida Statutes (2004), which states . . . State Farm argued that its policy language pursuant to 627.727(9)(d) entitled it to summary judgment . . . Section 627.727(1) states in pertinent part: When an insured or lessee has initially selected limits . . . The divorce between Lori and Sean makes no difference in applying section 627.727(1). . . .

METROPOLITAN CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, v. TEPPER,, 969 So. 2d 403 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Section 627.727(6)(a) provides that if an injured person is willing to accept a settlement offer from . . . However, the 1992 amendment to section 627.727(6) “substantially alter[ed] the landscape of uninsured . . . The last sentence of section 627.727(6)(b) specifically provides that a UM insurer is entitled to seek . . . Section 627.727(6)(a), Florida Statutes (2004) provides: If an injured person or, in the case of death . . . Section 627.727(6), Florida Statutes (1991) provided: If an injured person or, in the case of death, . . .

PHILPOT, v. UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 236 F. App'x 575 (11th Cir. 2007)

. . . Section 627.727(1) of the Florida Statutes provides, in pertinent part: No motor vehicle liability insurance . . . Stat. § 627.727 (emphasis added). . . . Stat. § 627.727 has no application to Philpot’s claims. Without the application of Fla. . . . . § 627.727,-Philpot concedes that he has no valid claim. . . .

PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, v. SCOMA,, 975 So. 2d 461 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . 627.736, Florida Statutes (2000), and the uninsured motorist coverage provided to comply with section 627.727 . . .

DAIRYLAND INSURANCE COMPANY, v. CREWS, II,, 222 F. App'x 951 (11th Cir. 2007)

. . . See § 627.727, Fla. Stat. We review the district court’s order granting summary judgment de novo. . . .

TOBIN, v. MICHIGAN MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. v. J. v. a, 476 F.3d 1191 (11th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 627.727, that the policy should be construed to provide coverage notwithstanding the intent of Ford . . . STAT. § 627.727, AND IF SO, WHETHER AS TO PRIMARY COVERAGE THAT STATUTE APPLIES ONLY TO FORD OR TO THE . . . STAT. § 627.727 AND, IF NOT, WHAT IS THE RESULT OF FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH SUCH STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS . . . STAT. § 627.727, AND IF SO, WHETHER AS TO EXCESS COVERAGE THAT STATUTE APPLIES ONLY TO FORD OR TO THE . . . STAT. § 627.727, AND, IF NOT, WHAT IS THE RESULT OF FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH SUCH STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS . . .

TOBIN, v. MICHIGAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 948 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 2006)

. . . Co., 420 So.2d 1086, 1087 (Fla.1982) (“[S]ection 627.727(1) ... requires insurers to provide uninsured . . . As such, they would be entitled to UM/UIM coverage under the policy by operation of section 627.727 of . . . See § 627.727, Fla. Stat. (2004). . . . coverage and benefits under a theory that the insurance policy at issue did not comply with section 627.727 . . . the policy makes a written rejection of the coverage on behalf of all insureds under the policy. § 627.727 . . . was issued with respect to retail lessees” and, therefore, the district court concluded that section 627.727 . . . appellants have no relationship with the policy which would allow them to assert any rights under section 627.727 . . .

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. ROACH,, 945 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 2006)

. . . The federal court of appeals agreed but certified a question to this Court regarding section 627.727( . . . excess carrier has a duty to make available the uninsured motorists (UM) coverage required by section 627.727 . . . Accordingly, we held that the requirement of section 627.727(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1990), that automobile . . . Compare Ind.Code § 27-7-5-4 (West 2003) with § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (1999). . . . Compare Ind.Code § 27-7-5-5 (2004) with § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (1999). . . .

BODDEN, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 195 F. App'x 858 (11th Cir. 2006)

. . . Pursuant to Florida Statutes, section 627.727(G), State Farm advanced the amount of the settlement offer . . . The UM Policy also provides, in terms that track Florida Statute section 627.727, the procedures to be . . . Plaintiffs protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, we see nothing in Florida Stat. section 627.727 . . . Florida Statutes, § 627.727(6) provides: If an underinsured motorist insurer chooses to preserve its . . .

D. STERLING D. Jr. a D. v. OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,, 936 So. 2d 43 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Section 627.727(1), Florida Statutes (2002), states, in relevant part: No motor vehicle liability insurance . . . The Sterlings argue that the language in section 627.727(9)(d), which allows an insurance company to . . .

USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, v. M. SHELTON L., 932 So. 2d 605 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . . § 627.727(1), Fla. Stat. (2002). . . . See, e.g., § 627.727(8), Fla. . . .