Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...Second, FIGA argued that Jones had failed to timely file her claim, and that the claim was therefore barred. FIGA also asserted that damages against the Association were only available as permitted by section 768.81 of the Florida Statutes (1995) (the comparative negligence provision), as limited by section 631.57....

...amend the misrepresentation defense and limited liability argument, and was permitted to proceed on the timeliness defense. The issues were narrowed and limited when FIGA amended its affirmative defenses to assert that FIGA's liability is limited by section 631.57 of the Florida Statutes to the limits of the underlying insurance policy, the claim was not covered due to a material misrepresentation on Pratt's insurance application, and the claim was timebarred....

...The act is designed to protect Florida citizens, not the insurance industry. The Act obligates FIGA to respond to covered claims that arise either prior to adjudication of the insurer's insolvency or arise within thirty days after determination of insolvency of the responsible carrier. See § 631.57(1)(a)(1). The Act limits FIGA's liability for each covered claim to the amount in excess of $100 and less than $300,000. See § 631.57(1)(a)(2)....

...The association shall: . . . . (b) Be deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent. § 631.57(1)(b)....

...defend Michael Pratt. When Dealers became insolvent, FIGA assumed that duty as if Dealers had not become insolvent and was deemed the insolvent insurer to the full extent of the policy coverage protection including the exclusive duty to defend. See § 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...f its obligations under the Act. To the contrary, Jones sought recovery based upon FIGA's refusal to satisfy the duty to defend and indemnify Pratt clearly held by Dealers Insurance and specifically imposed on FIGA by both the insurance contract and section 631.57 of the FIGA Act....

...osition that actions against FIGA alleging a violation of statutory and contractual duties are not cognizable, or are in all instances barred by the FIGA Act immunity provision. The applicable statute itself clearly provides that FIGA may "be sued." § 631.57(2)(c), Fla....

...f any judgment that should be entered under these circumstances. FIGA's Duty to Pay Amounts in Excess of Policy Limits The FIGA Act obligates FIGA to the extent of covered claims for that amount which is in excess of $100 but less than $300,000. See § 631.57(1)(a)(2)....

...The $300,000 liability cap becomes applicable only if FIGA's obligation would otherwise exceed that amount. In all other cases, liability is generally limited to the amount for which the insurer would have otherwise been responsible under the policy. See § 631.57(1)(a)(3)....

...Attorney's fees may also be awarded pursuant to section 631.70 of the Florida Statutes when FIGA denies a covered claim by affirmative action other than delay. See § 631.70. The Act specifically provides that "[i]n no event shall the association be liable for any penalties or interest." See § 631.57(1)(b)....

...us interest on that amount as provided under the policy's supplementary payment provision, and statutory interest from the date of the judgment against FIGA until payment along with attorney fees due to FIGA's denial of coverage. The precise text of section 631.57 of the FIGA Act provides: (1) The association shall: (a)1....

...shall include only that amount of each covered claim which is in excess of $100 and less than $300,000. . . . 3. In no event shall the association be obligated to a policyholder or claimant in an amount in excess of the obligation of the insolvent insurer under the policy from which the claim arises. § 631.57, Fla....

...In a similar manner, the concept of a "covered claim" is defined and limited by the statutory definitional phrase "is within the coverage, and not in excess of, the applicable limits of an insurance policy." § 631.54(3), Fla. Stat. (1995). Further, FIGA is "obligated to the extent of the covered claims." § 631.57(1)(a)(1), Fla....

...Our duty to pay interest ends when we pay or tender our limit of liability. As provided under the Act, FIGA is deemed the "insurer" to the extent of covered claims and has the same obligations as the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not been declared insolvent. See § 631.57(1)(b); Fla....

...Johnson, 654 So.2d 239, 241 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (determining that there was a statutory basis upon which to assess court costs in excess of policy limits because FIGA "stands in the shoes" of the insolvent insurer). The obligations imposed on FIGA under section 631.57(1)(b) must be construed liberally to effect the purposes of the FIGA Act, see § 631.53, one of which is to avoid financial loss to claimants or policyholders because of the insolvency of the insurer....

...h supplementary payment provisions, but based on its conclusion that the language promising payment of expenses incurred at the insurer's request could not be reasonably interpreted to include litigation expenses. See id. at 300. [7] The language in section 631.57 providing that "[i]n no event shall the association be liable for any penalties or interest," § 631.57(1)(b), does not undermine the conclusion that FIGA is liable under the policy's supplementary payment coverage provision for interest accruing on an underlying judgment. Some Florida courts in a different context have interpreted the language of section 631.57 as precluding awards of interest directly against FIGA that predate entry of a judgment against the Association where no supplementary payment coverage benefit issue was involved....

...ered claims that arise prior to adjudication of the insurer's insolvency and within a specified period after insolvency. Jones v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n , 908 So.2d 435, 442 (Fla. 2005); see § 631.54(3), Fla. Stat. (2010) (defining "covered claim"); § 631.57, Fla....

...In our opinion filed November 8, 1974, we held that Section 627.428, F.S. was not applicable to suits against FIGA because FIGA was not an "insurer", nor would any judgment against FIGA be "under a policy or contract executed by it". Appellant suggests that in so holding we must have overlooked the provisions of Section 631.57(1)(b), F.S. which read as follows: "631.57 Powers and duties of the association....

...— "(1) The association shall: * * * * * * "(b) Be deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and to such extent shall have all rights, duties, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent." Indeed, we did overlook the provisions of Section 631.57(1)(b), F.S....

...[3] The trial court entered a judgment against FIGA, holding that the estate and each survivor had separate claims up to $300,000. FIGA appealed and the district court held that, under a wrongful death action, multiple survivors have only a single claim under section 631.57, Florida Statutes (1991)....

...Mutual Insurance Company [Consolidated] and excess insurance coverage under an umbrella policy with Public Service Mutual Insurance Company. During the course of the personal injury action, Consolidated became insolvent, and FIGA, in accordance with section 631.57, Florida Statutes (1977), assumed Consolidated's duties and obligations....

...The trial court erred, therefore, in granting FIGA summary judgment. See Van Dusen v. Southeast First National Bank of Miami, 478 So.2d 82, 89-92 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). We, consequently, reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed herein. Reversed and remanded. NOTES [1] Section 631.57, Florida Statutes (1985), provides: (1) The association shall: (a) Be obligated to the extent of the covered claims existing: * * * * * * 3......

...[2] The supreme court quashed in part and approved in part the decision of the fourth district court of appeal, 425 So.2d 594 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). [3] FIGA "stands in the shoes" of the insolvent insurer. Peoples v. Florida Ins. Guar. Ass'n, 313 So.2d 40, 41 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975), cert. denied, 327 So.2d 34 (Fla. 1976); § 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...Rego was insured with Reserve Insurance Company, with policy limits of $300,000. Rego also had excess coverage with Employer's Reinsurance Company. Reserve undertook the defense of Giordano's suit against its insured until May 31, 1979, when Reserve was declared insolvent. The claim was then sent to FIGA pursuant to section 631.57, Florida Statutes (1979). In January, 1980, FIGA learned that the insured was an Illinois corporation. While FIGA was officially listed as the primary carrier for purposes of the lawsuit until July, 1980, FIGA had adopted the position in January, 1980, that pursuant to section 631.57(2), the Illinois Guaranty Fund (IGF), with statutory coverage limits of $150,000, was the "primary" carrier and FIGA, with statutory coverage limits of $300,000, was an "excess" carrier with no obligations owed to the insured....

...y the settlement. It also held that Mrs. Giordano was not entitled to any attorney's fees or costs. This appeal and cross-appeal ensued. II The two sections of Chapter 631, Florida Statutes, which are relevant to our consideration are the following: 631.57 Powers and duties of the association....

...d. Nothing in the statute provides for that position. The statute clearly states that FIGA shall be deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligations on the covered claims and shall have all rights, duties and obligations of the insolvent insurer. § 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...ve become insolvent." § 631.51, Fla. Stat. (1979). In establishing the institution, however, the legislature was careful to restrict its potential liability not only concerning its vicarious responsibility for the acts of the companies it succeeds, § 631.57(1)(a) Fla....

...Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, 374 So.2d 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), and Martino v. Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, 383 So.2d 942 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) all involved questions relating only to the liability of FIGA in its capacity as the entity deemed by Section 631.57(1)(b) Florida Statutes (1979) to be the "insurer" of the covered claims of its insolvent predecessor....

...on had occurred, the error could have affected the outcome of the case. It, therefore, requires a reversal of the judgment. B. Pre-judgment Interest Appellants contend that FIGA cannot be held liable for pre-judgment interest, under Florida Statutes § 631.57, which provides that “[i]n no event shall [FIGA] be liable for any penalties or interest.” Fla. Stat. § 631.57 (l)(b)....

...Appellee contends that these cases involve claims for workmen’s compensation and do not apply in the context of fire insurance claims. The compensation sought in each of those cases was for a “covered claim,” Fla.Stat. § 631.54(3), which FIGA is obligated to pay under *1533 § 631.57(l)(a)....

...ch are “covered claims” for which FIGA is obligated, Fla. Stat. § 631.54 (3). NCNB National Bank of Florida v. F.I.G.A., 541 So.2d 728 (Fla. 1st Dist.Ct.App.1989). The court permitted an award of post-judgment interest but stated that Fla.Stat. § 631.57(l)(b) precludes a pre-judgment interest award against FIGA....

...or post-judgment interest, the statute does not mean precisely what it says and can thus be read to permit payment of pre-judgment interest. We do not agree. There is a significant difference between pre- and post-judgment interest. The FIGA statute § 631.57(l)(b) deals with what is to be recoverable against FIGA....

....When an insurer becomes insolvent, "FIGA is deemed the ‘insurer' to the extent of covered claims and has the same obligations as the insolvent insurer,” except as limited by statute. Jones v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, 908 So.2d 435, 454 (Fla.2005); see also § 631.57, Fla....

...Before declaring insolvency, Manatee had spent just under $200,000 on defense costs. Thus, under the original $1,000,000 declining balance policy, $800,000 remained available for indemnification. FIGA took the position that its $300,000 per claim liability limit pursuant to section 631.57(1)(a)2, Florida Statutes (1997), applied to the Rumger-Manatee policy's declining balance provision, meaning that only $300,000 was available for both indemnification and all costs, including attorneys' fees....

...e industrial claims reparation system. Perhaps this would be a preferable kind of system. It is not, however, the system adopted by the Florida Legislature. Turning to a second issue, appellant Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, Inc. urges that section 631.57(1), Florida Statutes (1984), limits its liability for claims other than those of injured workers to $300,000....

...Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, Inc., 304 So.2d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974), cert. den., 315 So.2d 469 (Fla. 1975). We find the statutory language unambiguous, and the statutory cap of $300,000 is not applicable to "any covered claim arising out of a workers' compensation policy." § 631.57(1), F.S....

...plex cases such as the one before us. As cross-appellant points out, for example, while here the order for fees provides for interest on the deferred installments, whether or not this provision is enforceable against FIGA is brought into question by section 631.57(1), Florida Statutes, which provides in part: "In no event shall the association be liable for any penalties or interest." Thus, the prospect for future litigation on this account, and from other circumstances that might be easily imag...

...breach of contract. However, this argument misinterprets the extent of FIGA's obligations. FIGA is strictly a creature of statute. See § 631.55 (creating FIGA as a nonprofit corporation that shall have the powers and duties defined by section *1130 631.57). Therefore, the statutory language defines the extent of FIGA's obligations. FIGA is not responsible for claims against an insurer that do not fall within FIGA's statutory obligations. Under section 631.57(1)(a), FIGA is obligated "to the extent of the covered claims existing" prior to adjudication of insolvency and within a specified period after insolvency. In addition, under section 631.57(1)(b), FIGA shall "[b]e deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims." Thus, FIGA is responsible for the damages otherwise owed by Reliance only if those damages constitute a covered claim as defined by chapter 631....

...Rodriguez, 349 So.2d 826 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Sottile v. Gaines Construction Company, 281 So.2d 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973); Baum v. Pines Realty, Inc., 164 So.2d 517 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964); and generally 47 Am.Jur.2d, Judgments §§ 1152 et seq. The relevant provision of Section 631.57 states unequivocally that: "(1) The association shall: "(a) Be obligated to the extent of the covered claims existing: "1....

...3d DCA 1966); Allstate Insurance Company v. Warren, 125 So.2d 886 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961). Reversed and remanded. NOTES [1] The Florida Insurance Guaranty Association is a non-profit corporation created by statute — § 631.55, Fla. Stat. (1975). Pursuant to § 631.57, Fla....

...With regard to our finding that interest should have been awarded, the E/C has informed this Court that the carrier at risk, Cosmopolitan Mutual Insurance Company, has gone into liquidation and its successor, Florida Insurance Guaranty Association ["FIGA"], cannot be held liable for either penalties or interest. § 631.57(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1979)....

...imits of coverage of $3,000,000 per occurrence. Integrity became insolvent and pursuant to chapter 631, Florida Statutes (1985), FIGA became obligated to pay Integrity's "covered claims," as defined by section 631.54(3), [2] Florida Statutes (1985). Section 631.57(1)(a)3, [3] Florida Statutes (1985) limits FIGA's obligation for each "covered claim" to $300,000....

...(FIGA), alleging Southern *194 American had dealt in bad faith with the plaintiffs-appellants. The trial court dismissed the complaint. We affirm. The trial court was correct, because FIGA is not liable for any amounts in excess of policy limits and is not vicariously liable for tortious acts of members' insurers. Section 631.57(1)(a)3 Florida Statutes (1975)....

...The trial court determined that Florida Preferred’s payment of the appraisal award to Petty constituted a confession of judgment by the insurer and thus invoked the mandatory attorney’s fee provisions of section 627.428. The court recognized that under section 631.57(1), FIGA was “obligated to the extent of the covered claims” that existed before the adjudication of insolvency....

...contesting valid claims, and to reimburse insureds for them attorney’s fees incurred when they must enforce in court their contract with the insurance company.” Id. (quoting Bell v. U.S.B. Acquisition Co., 734 So.2d 403 , 411 n. 10 (Fla.1999)). Section 631.57(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2008) (emphasis added), provides that FIGA shall “[b]e obligated to the extent of the covered claims existing” prior to an insurer’s adjudication of insolvency....

...roceedings. We disagree. The rule nisi action authorized by Section 440.24(1), Florida Statutes (1977) was specifically designed to secure the enforcement of duly entered compensation orders against employers and carriers such as Consolidated. Under Section 631.57(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1979), FIGA is subject to all of the "rights, duties and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent." It is obvious therefore that it was amenable, as Consolidated's replacement, to the petition for a rule nisi....

...Stat. (1977). Steele v. A.D.H. Building Contractors, Inc., 196 So.2d 430 (Fla. 1967); McCormick v. Messink 208 So.2d 113 (Fla.2d DCA 1968), cert. denied, 218 So.2d 174 (Fla. 1968). FIGA's liability under that statute is unaffected by Sec. 631.70. Sec. 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...[2] Otherwise, *422 the judgment under review is affirmed. Affirmed in part, reversed in part. [3] NOTES [1] § 440.34, Fla. Stat. (1977). Fee awards are not "penalties," such as those provided in Section 440.20(5), (6), Florida Statutes (1977), for which FIGA would not have been liable under Sec. 631.57(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (1979), discussed infra. [2] FIGA's non-liability for interest applies, under Sec. 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...Based on the errors and omissions of the insurance agent as alleged in this case, [4] we do not think there is a sufficient basis to find a "covered claim" under Chapter 631. [5] AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] §§ 631.51(1), 631.54(3), Fla. Stat. (1983). [2] § 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...Olympus Ass’n, Inc., 34 So.3d 791, 794 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)); Williams v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, Inc., 549 So.2d 253 , 254 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). The FIGA Act created FIGA in section 631.55, Florida Statutes, and established its powers and duties in section 631.57....

...to the insurer being adjudicated insolvent). Finally, we have not overlooked Bernard’s argument that FIGA’s liability cannot be governed by the definition of “covered claim” in effect at the time the insurer is adjudicated insolvent because section 631.57(l)(a)l.a., Florida Statutes, provides that FIGA is obligated to the extent of “the covered claims existing [pjrior to adjudication of insolvency.” Read literally, this statute appears to provide support for Bernard’s argument bec...

...atutory definition in effect at the time of their existence. However, because that interpretation would essentially read the insolvency requirement out of the statutory definition of “covered claim,” we agree with FIGA that the better reading of section 631.57(l)(a)l.a....

...lliams v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, 549 So.2d 253 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (citing, without analysis, the 1983 version of the FIGA Act in a case involving a 1985 insolvency). . We are aware of cases from other states relying on language similar to that in section 631.57(l)(a)l.a., Florida Statutes, to hold that claims arising prior to the effective date of the guaranty act can be "covered claims” because the statutory definition of that term merely "categorize[s] the class or nature of claims covere...

...The insured made a claim to Atlantic Preferred, which evaluated the damage and determined the amount of loss did not exceed the insured’s deductible. Atlantic Preferred did not pay the claim. Subsequently, Atlantic Preferred was placed in receivership and, pursuant to section 631.57, FIGA stepped in to provide a mechanism for the payment of “covered claims.” FIGA reviewed the claim and agreed to send an independent third party adjuster to inspect the property and prepare an estimate of the damage....

...5th DCA 1989). Chapter 631 was designed to manage, but not bankrupt the statute’s funding and payment mechanism. Id. The FIGA Act limits the liability of FIGA and bestows upon FIGA all policy defenses as well as any defenses available under common law. § 631.57(l)(b), Fla....

...In no event is FIGA obligated to a policyholder or claimant in an amount in excess of the statutory maximum or in excess of the obligation of the insolvent insurer under the policy from which the claim arises. Jones v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, 908 So.2d 435, 453-54 (Fla. 2005) (citing § 631.57, Fla. Stat. (2008)). FIGA cannot be held liable for any penalties or interest. § 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...ated in Florida. The trial court's order of insolvency and liquidation is of concern to FIGA because the order triggered FIGA's statutory obligation to pay the covered claims of Main's Florida insureds and creditors under Sections 631.54(4), (5) and 631.57(1), Florida Statutes (1979)....

...Section 631.511, Florida Statutes. [2] Funds for FIGA's payment of covered claims are raised by assessments levied by the Department against all "member insurers" (Section 631.54(6)) which are then remitted to and administered by FIGA's board of directors. Section 631.57(3)(a). FIGA's liability for claims is governed by the statutes. Section 631.57(1), Florida Statutes, imposes the obligation upon FIGA to pay "covered claims," defined in Section 631.54(4) as claims arising out of insurance policies issued by an insolvent insurer....

...inful reemployment at a reasonable cost to the employer." Fla. Stat. § 440.015 (Supp. 1994). We also note that the legislature has directed that, in the event of an insurer insolvency, workers' compensation claims are to be paid in full. Fla. Stat. § 631.57(1)(a)2.a....

...On April 25, 2006, Southern Family was placed in receivership for liquidation purposes, and pursuant to section 631.041(1), Florida Statutes, all actions against the company were stayed. Southern Family's insolvency triggered FIGA's obligation, under section 631.57, Florida Statutes, to pay for "covered claims." Olympus's public adjuster, Joseph Zevuloni, demanded an appraisal for Buildings 500, 600, and 2500....

...We do not find this argument persuasive for, if such an interpretation were given, then FIGA would also be insulated from liability for other types of attorney's fees. Since such is not the case, we find FIGA's argument to be without merit. FIGA next argues that section 631.57(1)(a)(3) and (1)(b), Florida Statutes (1987), shield it from liability in the premises....

...Although we did not there address the arguments made by FIGA in the instant case, we find that those arguments are not so convincing as to merit a different result. Accordingly, we hold that a bad faith fee award is not a penalty within the meaning of Section 631.57....

...ey’s fees.” Ivey v. Allstate Ins. Co., 774 So.2d 679, 685 (Fla.2000). Appellant, when it assumes the liabilities of an insolvent insurance company, generally possesses “all rights, duties, defenses, and obligations of the insolvent insurer.” § 631.57(1)0»), Fla....

...enefits for two two-week periods, with interest. Because the JCC increased claimant's AWW, the employer and FIGA were ordered to adjust all past due compensation benefits, and pay penalties and interest. We affirm the JCC's order with one exception. Section 631.57(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1989), prohibits the award of prejudgment interest and penalties against FIGA....

...to section 440.02, regarding evaluation of non-cash compensation, to this 1984 accident. Anello v. Friendship Village Convalescent Home, 546 So.2d 1119 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); and Recon Paving, Inc. v. Cook, 439 So.2d 1019 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). However, section 631.57(1)(b) prohibits the award of prejudgment interest and penalties on the adjustment of AWW against FIGA, which took over management of this claim in 1987 after the employer's workers' compensation carrier became insolvent. Spenco Industries v. Molano, 537 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); and Carballo v. Warren Manufacturing Co., 407 So.2d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Claimant argues that while section 631.57(1)(b) provides that FIGA is not subject to penalties and interest, this statute can be construed as meaning simply that FIGA is not responsible for penalties and interest caused and incurred by the employer before FIGA took over....

...v. Renfroe, 568 So.2d 962 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) wherein this court affirmed an award of bad faith attorney's fees against FIGA, this court expressly premised its holding upon a finding that attorney's fees are not a penalty so that the proscription of section 631.57(1)(b) did not apply....

...In the final judgment, the trial court found that Infante's testimony was highly credible and that NCNB's claim was a "covered claim" within the meaning of that term in chapter 631, Florida Statutes. In response to FIGA's argument that it could not be strapped with interest on the loan to FPS because of the wording of section 631.57(1)(b), which provides that "in no event shall the Association be liable for any penalties or interest," the court determined that the statute referred to interest on judgments against FIGA and "accordingly interest shall not run on thi...

...Thereupon, he awarded NCNB $2,582,308.93. FIGA moved to alter or amend the judgment to deny NCNB's claim or alternatively to eliminate the award of prejudgment interest. At the hearing on that motion, FIGA raised an additional issue for the first time, arguing that the 631.57(1) cap of $300,000 on the amount that may be awarded on a single claim applies in this case....

...which were well under the $300,000 cap. NCNB also requested the opportunity to submit evidence to show that its claim was not a single claim but actually constituted multiple claims. However, in the amended final judgment, the trial judge found that 631.57(1)(a) limits NCNB's recovery *731 to less than $300,000 and thereupon, without granting NCNB's request, he reduced NCNB's award to $299,900....

...Despite the fact that, at the motion hearing, the parties agreed and the judge conceded that he had erred in not awarding post-judgment interest, the judge failed to correct the amended final judgment to make such an award. We find that the trial judge erred in applying the 631.57(1) $300,000 cap to NCNB's claim in this case as its claim clearly was in actuality multiple claims arising from multiple policies. He further erred in failing to award post-judgment interest which clearly is not prohibited by the provisions of 631.57(1)(b)....

...In the original final judgment, the trial judge awarded approximately 2.5 million dollars which, according to all the evidence in the record in this respect, especially Strader's testimony, included interest which had accrued since November 12, 1984. We find that 631.57(1)(b) does preclude the award of interest (upon claims against FIGA) which has accrued from the time the claim arose until entry of judgment....

...The trial court determined that Florida Preferred's payment of the appraisal award to Petty constituted a confession of judgment by the insurer and thus invoked the mandatory attorney's fee provisions of section 627.428. The court recognized that under section 631.57(1), FIGA was "obligated to the extent of the covered claims" that existed before the adjudication of insolvency....

...eof. In this case, FIGA did not wrongfully refuse to pay any policy benefits. The Act obligates FIGA "to the extent of the covered claims existing" before "adjudication of insolvency and arising within 30 days after the determination of insolvency." § 631.57(1)(a)(1)(a)....

...iation ("FIGA"). We affirm. In 1990, Minagorri was involved in an automobile accident with another driver, whose insurance company thereafter became insolvent. Statutorily, FIGA assumed all responsibilities of the tortfeasor's insurance company. See § 631.57(1), Fla.Stat....

...Chapter 631 was enacted to protect against financial losses incurred by Florida's policyholders and claimants upon the insolvency of insurers. The statutory benefits are available if a claimant presents a "covered claim" to the guaranty association. § 631.57, Fla....

...ent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, 5 defenses, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent.” § 631.57(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (2011); see also § 631.57(1)(a)1.a., Fla....

...Plainly, FIGA, under these circumstances, is "deemed the insurer [of the tortfeasor] to the extent of its obligation in the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent." § 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...Southern Family did not give the section 627.7015 notice at the time Shadow Wood filed its claim shortly after Hurricane Wilma. FIGA is bound by Southern Family's failure to give the section 627.7015 notice, so that section 627.7015(7) applies. [2] Under section 631.57(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2005), FIGA is "deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, defenses, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent." Reading section 631.57(1)(b) together with section 627.7015, it does not appear that the legislature intended to excuse FIGA from the notice requirement....

...tion to litigation. FIGA also argues that the notice provisions of the statute (and the consequent loss of appraisal rights) should not apply to it, because it is a creature of statute and is not subject to all the liability of the insurer. However, section 631.57(1)(b), Florida Statutes, provides that FIGA shall "[b]e deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, defenses, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent." (Emphasis supplied)....

POLEN, Judge. The Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, Inc. (FIGA) appeals a final judgment in favor of an injured plaintiff, Terrance Johnson, for costs of $3,062.11 over and above the damage award of $9,900.00. Pursuant to section 631.57(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1991), FIGA became liable to Johnson upon the insolvency of the tortfeasor’s insurer, First Miami Insurance Company (First Miami), after Johnson’s jury trial against the tortfea-sor. FIGA contests the cost award as being in excess of the policy limits. 1 We affirm. It is established law in Florida that after an insurer becomes insolvent, FIGA “stands in the shoes” of the insolvent insurer, and, pursuant to section 631.57(3)(b) Florida Statutes (1991), will “be deemed the insurer *240 to the extent of its obligations on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent” (emphasis added)....

...y, which provides: The limits of liability shown in the declarations for “each person” for bodily injury liability is our maximum limit of liability for all damages for bodily injuries sustained by any one person in any one auto accident. Citing section 631.57(l)(a)(3), Florida Statutes, FIGA argues that, based on this policy language, as well as the applicable provisions of the FIGA Act, the trial court committed reversible error in holding FIGA liable for a cost judgment which, it claims,...

...Thus, the appellant further contends that, since FIGA was not the party against whom *241 Johnson prevailed, the court erred in assessing those costs against FIGA. In response, the appellee again argues that the statutory basis upon which it relies is section 631.57(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1991) (the association shall “be deemed the insured to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims ......

...order if, subsequently, such were determined necessary by DFS. By virtue of a November 18, 2011 Consent Order, First Home was declared insolvent, and DFS’s role as receiver was transformed from rehabilitation facilitator to liquidator. On that date, pursuant to section 631.57 of the Florida Statutes and the Consent Order, FIGA was deemed Mendoza’s insurer to the extent that Mendoza’s claims against First Home were “covered claims,” as that term is defined in section 631.54(3) of the Florida Statu...

...(2011). When an insurer is declared insolvent, DFS is appointed the receiver for that insolvent insurer. § 631.051, Fla. Stat. (2011). As part of DFS’s receivership, FIGA administers the claim functions and guarantees the “covered claims” of the insolvent insurer. § 631.57, Fla. Stat. (2011). Pursuant to, and subject to the limitations of, section 631.57, FIGA is obligated to pay “covered claims.”6 year after the deadline for filing claims, or any extension thereof, with the receiver of the insolvent insurer shall thenceforth be barred as a claim against the association and the insured. § 631.68, Fla. Stat. (2011). 6A covered claim means an unpaid claim, including one of unearned premiums, which arises out of, and is within the coverage, and not in 6  Significantly, section 631.57(1)(b) provides, in relevant part, that FIGA “[b]e deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, defenses, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent.” § 631.57(1)(b), Fla. Stat....

...requires affirmance. Upon the declaration of First Home’s insolvency, FIGA, by statutory authority, became Mendoza’s insurer, having the duty to defend against Mendoza’s first-party lawsuit, as if First Home had not become insolvent. § 631.57(1)(b), Fla. Stat....

...effect when DFS filed its petition against First Home, and that stay is permanent because of the Consent Order requiring the liquidation of First Home. § 631.041(1), Fla. Stat. (2011). Mendoza’s substitution motion merely reflected what had already occurred by operation of section 631.57(1)(b) when First Home was declared insolvent. C....

...to sue or serve FIGA in pending cases against the insolvent insurer is contrary to FIGA’s express statutory directive that FIGA “have all duties, defenses and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent.” § 631.57(1)(b), Fla. Stat....

...3d 627, 631 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). Against this backdrop, we conclude that the limitations period in section 631.68 is inapplicable to first-party lawsuits pending against the insurer when the insurer is declared insolvent. IV. Conclusion Sections 631.57(1)(b) and 631.67 provide the mechanism for what happens when a defendant insurer in a pending first-party lawsuit is declared insolvent....

...The trial court determined that Florida Preferred’s payment of the appraisal award to Petty constituted a confession of judgment by the insurer and thus invoked the mandatory attorney’s fee provisions of section 627.428. The court recognized that under section 631.57(1), FIGA was “obligated to the extent of the covered claims” that existed before the adjudication of insolvency....

...In this case, FIGA did not wrongfully refuse to pay any policy benefits. The Act obligates FIGA “to the extent of the covered claims existing” before “adjudication of insolvency and arising within 30 days after the determination of insolvency.” § 631.57(l)(a)(l)(a)....

judgment constitutes a “covered claim” under section 631.57(l)(b), Florida Statutes, which provides that

...ranty and pay certain claims on behalf of insolvent insurers. § 631.51, Fla. Stat. (1983). The recovery guaranteed under FIGA is limited to amounts between $100 and $300,000 to a single claimant for each covered claim as defined under that chapter. § 631.57, Fla....

...ute which generally prohibits the joinder of the insurance carrier in a liability action against the insured. See § 627.7262, Fla. Stat. (1983). In this instance, because the association takes the place of the insolvent insurer, Iowa National ( see § 631.57(1)(b)), Queen in most instances [3] would be unable to sue both the association and the insured simultaneously....

...by the Florida Department of Financial Services. [2] Under Florida's statutory insurer liquidation system, FIGA became directly liable to Fortune's insureds "to the extent of the covered claims" existing before the insurer was adjudicated insolvent. § 631.57, Fla....

...governed by a committee selected by the member insurers, is a business entity, not “an arm of the government.” Id. Additionally, FIGA has never been referred to as a governmental entity; it has not received public funding; its enabling statute, § 631.57(3)(d), Fla....

that FIGA could pay money to settle a claim. See § 631.57(2), (5). But, it continued, "[i]t's

...Based on the errors and omissions of the insurance agent as alleged in this case, 4 we do not think there is a sufficient basis to find a “covered claim” under Chapter 631. 5 AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ„ concur. . §§ 631.51(1), 631.54(3), Fla. Stat. (1983). . § 631.57(l)(b), Fla....

...of Sunrise Condominium Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment and denying FIGA’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. We affirm because the trial court properly found that there are seven separate covered claims involved in this action within the meaning of section 631.57(2), Florida Statutes (2008), and properly ordered seven separate appraisals in accordance with the terms of the insurance policy and applicable law....

...SFIC subsequently issued seven separate checks totaling $268,994.54, and divided the policy limit between the seven buildings, depending on the valuation of each building and the damage attributable to each building. When SFIC became insolvent, FIGA took over the obligations of SFIC pursuant to section 631.57(l)(a)l., Florida Statutes (2008). Sunrise was not satisfied with the amounts paid by SFIC and requested supplemental payments from FIGA. FIGA *1041 tendered $299,900, which represented the statutory cap of $300,000 that FIGA was required to pay on each covered claim pursuant to section 631.57, Florida Statutes (2008), less the $100 FIGA deductible. FIGA took the position that the claims constituted a lump sum obligation for only one claim under the SFIC policy and that FIGA had only one $300,000 limit of liability under section 631.57(l)(a)2., Florida Statutes....

...FIGA appealed, and this court has jurisdiction pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv), which allows review of orders that determine entitlement to an appraisal under an insurance policy. This case presents an issue of first impression, as both parties agree there is no case law interpreting section 631.57(l)(a)2 in the context raised in this appeal. Section 631.57 entitled “Powers and duties of the association” provides, in pertinent part: (1) The association shall: (a) Be obligated to the extent of the covered claims existing: [[Image here]] 2....

...See Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n. v. Johnson, 654 So.2d 239 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Johnson acknowledges that “[i]t is established law in Florida that after an insurer becomes insolvent, FIGA ‘stands in the shoes’ of the insolvent insurer, and, pursuant to section 631.57(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1991), will ‘be deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligations on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent.’ ” Id....

PER CURIAM. Affirmed on the authority of Rivera v. Southern American Fire Insurance Co., 361 So.2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 368 So.2d 1372 (Fla.1979). See also section 631.57(l)(a)(3), Florida Statutes (1975)....

...of the insolvency of an insurer.” See § 631.51(1), Fla. Stat. (1995). The Association is a statutorily-created nonprofit corporation that pays specified claims owed by insolvent insurance companies that most likely would be otherwise unpaid. See § 631.57(1), Fla....

...Accordingly, the Florida Legislature has treated FIGA differently from the insolvent insurance companies it pays claims for, by providing various limitations on claims FIGA is obligated to pay, a one-year statute of limitations, and immunity to FIGA. See §§ 631.57, 631.66, 631.68, 95.11(5)(d), Fla....

...be maintained). Therefore, we hold that appellee’s alleged causes of action are not cognizable. REVERSED and REMANDED. VAN NORTWICK, J., and SMITH, LARRY G., Senior Judge, concur. . The trial court apparently limited the award to $299,900 based on section 631.57(l)(a)2., Florida Statutes, which limits the amount of covered claims to the amount which is in excess of $100 and is less than $300,000.”

...§ 631.56(1). In fact, none of those who work for the FIGA are general state employees; they either remain employees of the insurance companies, and have their expenses reimbursed by the FIGA, § 631.-56(3), or they are employed directly by the FIGA itself. §§ 631.57(2)(a), 631.57(5)....

...ts operation. When the activity is govern-mentally supervised and the taxpayer is financially interested, the indication is strong that the activity is governmental.” [emphasis supplied] It seems clear that the FIGA is instead correctly viewed, as § 631.57(l)(b) specifically provides, as an “insurer” of the covered claims of the insolvent carrier in question....

...Absent the governmental privilege, venue was properly laid in Dade County as the county in which the cause of action accrued. § 47.011, Fla.Stat. (1977). . We think it makes no difference that payments by an insurer to the FIGA are required as a condition of its voluntary act of transacting business in our state. § 631.57....

$300,000 per claim liability (established in section 631.57(l)(a)2., Florida Statutes) applied to the Rumger-Mana-tee

...$28,000 for above-ground damages and $170,000 for below-ground damages, the trial court ultimately entered a final judgment in the amount of $135,515, which represented Pupo's policy limits of $138,115 less her policy deductible and less the statutory deductible set forth in section 631.57(1)(a)(2), Florida Statutes (2009). Pupo initiated this appeal arguing that contrary to this and other appellate courts' prior holdings, the amended definition of "covered claim" in section 631.54(3)(c), Florida Statute...

...bit FIGA from paying an insured directly for a sinkhole loss. Id. The Florida Supreme Court recently approved our decision. de la Fuente v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n, 202 So. 3d 396, 403-05 (Fla. 2016). -2- 631.57(1)(a)(2)....

...We direct that on remand, the trial court should correct the final judgment to reflect that Pupo is required to enter into repair contracts within the jury verdict amounts and that FIGA is required to pay actual repair costs to the contractors up to the combined statutory cap set forth in section 631.57(1)(a)(2). Affirmed; remanded with directions. NORTHCUTT and KELLY, JJ., Concur. 2Section 631.57(1)(a)(2) lists statutory cap amounts on FIGA's liability for covered claims that are "in excess of $100 and ....

...FIGA is not responsible for claims against an insurer that do not fall within FIGA’s statutory obligations. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, Inc. v. Devon Neighborhood Ass’n, Inc., 67 So. 3d 187, 189–90 (Fla. 2011) (quotations and citations omitted); see also § 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

Insurance Guaranty Association Act (FIGA Act), Section 631.-57(l)(a)3, Florida Statutes, relating to claims

...mitigate, minimize or avoid" the sinkhole damage. Ultimately, Miller filed a motion for summary judgment, but by then FIGA completed its investigation, and it accepted coverage of the claim the day before the 1 See § 631.57(1)(a)(1)(a), Fla....

...Liability for' attorney’s fees under section 440.34 is unaffected by section 631.70. See Florida Insurance Guaranty Association v. Gustinger, 390 So.2d 420 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The fact that FIGA took no affirmative action in the handling of the claim is irrelevant. Section 631.57(l)(a) provides that FIGA shall be obligated to the extent of the covered claims and shall pay the full amount of any covered claim arising out of a workers’ compensation policy. Section 631.57(l)(b) provides that FIGA shall be “deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent....

...Hudson’s insurer at the time of the fire. Atlantic subsequently became insolvent. Accordingly, under the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association Act, Florida Insurance Guaranty Association (FIGA) assumed Atlantic’s obligations to Mr. Hudson. See § 631.57, Fla....

...§ 631.53. When an insurer is declared insolvent, FIGA is "deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, defenses, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent." § 631.57(1)(b)....

...Gonzalez and Perdomo filed their lawsuit against Homewise prior to the declaration of insolvency. Upon the declaration of Homewise's insolvency, FIGA statutorily became Gonzalez and Perdomo's insurer, having the duty to defend against their first-party lawsuit as if Homewise had not become insolvent. See § 631.57(1)(b)....

..."statutory scheme [of chapter 631] governing insolvent insurers[] and the role of FIGA in that scheme." Id. at 943. Specifically, the court pointed out that "Mendoza's substitution motion merely reflected what had already occurred by operation of section 631.57(1)(b) when [the insurer] was declared insolvent." Id....

...This appeal presents an issue as to whether the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association [FIGA], as the statutory successor 1 to insolvent insurer Biscayne Insurance Company, is vicariously estopped from denying that Biscayne had the duty to defend and indemnify its insured, 2 thus FIGA is obligated by Section 631.57(l)(b), Florida Statutes (2003) 3 to put on Biscayne’s hat and indemnify the insured in the underlying negligence suit....

...The final judgment simply assumes, contrary to Doe v. Allstate, that once Biscayne filed an answer in the underlying action, neither Biscayne nor FIGA could deny coverage. The final judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded with instructions to enter judgment for FIGA. . See § 631.57, Fla. Stat. (2003). . Although we use "insured” we have concluded, as did the trial court, that there was no coverage by Biscayne. . § 631.57(l)(b), Fla....

631.54(4), Florida Statutes (1977). See also Section 631.57(1)(a)(3), Florida Statutes (1977). Admittedly

...No provision of the Act bars a trial court from granting a claim in excess of the policy limits. By comparison, payment of excess judgment claims is expressly prohibited in the Florida Insurance Guaranty Payment Act, a similar statute regulating insurance. § 631.57(1)(a)4., Fla....

...2d 214 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). When an insurer becomes insolvent, “FIGA is deemed the ‘insurer’ to the extent of covered claims and has the same obligations as the insolvent insurer.” Jones v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, 908 So. 2d 435, 454 (Fla. 2005); see also, § 631.57, Fla. Stat. (2010). Although there is a permanent stay on any action against DFS as receiver, FIGA is amenable to suit in connection with any unpaid claims. Compare § 631.041, Fla. Stat. (2010) with § 631.57(2)(c)....

...and Lourdes Alatriste [Century Title], is affirmed. This claim was clearly covered by an insurance policy issued by the plaintiff Century’s insurer; this insurer has since been declared insolvent and on its face the defendant FIGA is therefore legally responsible for such claim. § 631.57(1), Fla.Stat....

...f Villas II, Inc. (“Golf Villas”) raises multiple arguments for reversal. We affirm the summary judgment entered in FIGA’s favor and explain our reasons for agreeing with FIGA on the limited issue of whether sections 95.11(2)(b) and (2)(e) and section 631.57(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2020), control this case....

...FIGA argued the purpose of sections 631.68 and 95.11(5)(d) is to shorten the time limit to file suit on FIGA claims as an additional protection against FIGA’s financial responsibility to resolve claims against an insolvent insurer. FIGA maintained it was entitled, pursuant to section 631.57(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2020), to rely on all defenses available to Insolvent Insurer, including the statute of limitations. Golf Villas opposed summary judgment....

...Golf Villas argued the applicable statute of limitations was the one-year period provided by sections 631.68 and 95.11(5)(d). Golf Villas contended the five-year 2 limitations period applicable to contract actions did not apply because section 631.57, relied upon by FIGA, did not refer to a limitation period and thus, the five-year limitation period would have applied had Insolvent Insurer not become insolvent. FIGA replied to Golf Villas’ response, noting, among other arguments, the FIGA stay ended on February 14, 2022....

...be used in this matter to find the filing date of the instant action is not violative of the statute of limitations. At first glance, it would appear that Florida Statute § 95.11(2)(b) and § 95.11(5)(d) are in conflict, but they are not. Florida Statute § 631.57 titled “powers and duties of the association [FIGA],[”] in part, provides FIGA “[b]e deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, defen...

...“It should never be presumed that the legislature intended to enact purposeless and therefore useless, legislation.” Sharer v. Hotel Corp. of Am., 144 So. 2d 813, 817 (Fla. 1962). If the Court were to take the [Golf Villas’] position, then it would render words in Florida Statute §631.57 purposeless....

...insurer, if such insurer becomes an insolvent insurer and the claimant or insured is a resident of this state at the time of the insured event or the property from which the claim arises is permanently located in this state. Section 631.57, Florida Statutes (2020), outlines FIGA’s powers and duties. Regarding claims existing prior to adjudication of insolvency, section 631.57(1)(a) provides that FIGA is “obligated to the extent of covered claims” with the caveat that FIGA is not responsible to pay more than $300,000 to $500,000, depending on the type of insurance provided by the policy. § 631.57(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2020). Pertinent to our analysis, section 631.57(1)(b) provides that FIGA shall “[b]e deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, defenses, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent.” § 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...st FIGA’s financial liabilities by offering even shorter limitations periods than might apply to parties other than FIGA, such as the five-year statute of limitation in sections 95.11(2)(b) and (2)(e). In other words, based on FIGA’s right under section 631.57(1)(b) to assert defenses which the insolvent insurer could have asserted if the insurer had not become insolvent, FIGA not only has the protections of the one-year statutes of limitations argued by Golf Villas, but also the five-year s...

...uant to the insolvency order. Thus, arguably, sections 95.11(5)(d) and 631.68 apply to this case. The question we confront is whether sections 95.11(5)(d) and 631.68 control this case as Golf Villas argues, or sections 95.11(2)(b) and (2)(e) and 631.57(1)(b) control as FIGA argues. We begin with the principle that courts must look to the text itself when interpreting statutes....

...“It should never be presumed that the legislature intended to enact purposeless and therefore useless, legislation.” Sharer v. Hotel Corp. of Am., 144 So. 2d 813,817 (Fla. 1962). If the Court were to take the Plaintiffs position, then it would render words in Florida Statute §631.57 [(allowing FIGA to assert defenses the insolvent insurer could assert if it was not insolvent)] purposeless. (emphasis added). 8  As we have stated previously: The FIGA Act limits the liability of FIGA and bestows upon FIGA all policy defenses as well as any defenses available under common law. § 631.57(1)(b), Fla....

...In no event is FIGA obligated to a policyholder or claimant in an amount in excess of the statutory maximum or in excess of the obligation of the insolvent insurer under the policy from which the claim arises. Jones v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, 908 So. 2d 435, 453–54 (Fla. 2005) (citing § 631.57, Fla. Stat. (2008)). Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n v. Smothers, 65 So. 3d 541, 542–43 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (emphasis added). If we are to honor the clear words of section 631.57(1)(b) that FIGA shall “[b]e deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, defenses, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not be...

...Interpreting the statutes as Golf Villas advocates would expand FIGA’s financial liability. The plain words of the statutes which we interpret tell us that is not the Legislature’s intent. We conclude the trial court properly applied sections 95.11(2)(b) and (2)(e) and section 631.57(1)(b) in determining Golf Villas’ suit against FIGA was time-barred. Conclusion Having determined the trial court correctly applied sections 95.11(2)(b) and (2)(e) and section 631.57(1)(b) to the undisputed material facts of this case, and finding no merit in Golf Villas’ other arguments on appeal, we affirm the trial court’s final summary judgment. 9  Affirmed. WARNER...

accrued but unpaid installments of compensation, section 631.57(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1977); Carballo v

...ything that falls within the definition of a covered claim. Generally, it is not required to pay the first $100 of a claim, and it does not guarantee payments over $300,000 in most instances. - 13 - § 631.57(1)(a)(2)....

...nsolvent insurer, it is "deemed the insurer to the extent of its obligation on the covered claims, and, to such extent, shall have all rights, duties, defenses, and obligations of the insolvent insurer as if the insurer had not become insolvent." § 631.57(1)(b). Thus, to establish the "covered claim" that is used to determine the guaranteed payment by FIGA under section 631.57, one starts with an "unpaid claim" that arises out of and is within the coverage of the relevant insurance policy. § 631.54(3)....

...procedures that would have been used by the insurance company if it had not become insolvent. In this adjusting process, FIGA has all of the "rights, duties, defenses, and obligations" that the insurance company had under the relevant insurance policy. See § 631.57(1)(b). In the case of sinkhole coverage, a contractual "appraisal" method to adjust the claim has evolved alongside other statutory requirements....

...Still, it seems to me that the appraisal mandated by the insurance policy is, in general, a logical and compatible method to help determine the "unpaid claim" that arises out of the insurance contract, which in turn is used to define the "covered claim" that ultimately measures the guaranty payment under section 631.57.3 To a large extent, the amount normally payable under an insurance policy for a sinkhole claim and the cost of the "actual repair" of the loss are similar....