Second DCA opinion on waiver of defense to bad faith claim

In Chad Frisco and Monique Frisco v. State Farm Florida Insurance Company, Case No. 2D2024-0464 (Fla. 2d DCA Dec. 3, 2025), the Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment entered in favor of State Farm Florida Insurance Company in a homeowners’ bad faith lawsuit. The dispute arose after the Friscos submitted a water intrusion claim that they alleged was mishandled, prompting them to file a Civil Remedy Notice (CRN) under section 624.155, Florida Statutes. Years into the litigation, State Farm argued the CRN was legally deficient because it demanded extra-contractual damages—specifically attorney’s fees and costs—relying on the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Talat Enterprises, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 753 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2000). The trial court agreed and entered summary judgment for the insurer.

On appeal, the Second District held that the insurer had waived this defense. Although State Farm had responded to the CRN on the merits, it did not raise any objection to the inclusion of attorney’s fees and costs at that time—or for several years thereafter. The court reiterated that an insurer who responds to a CRN without identifying alleged defects cannot later rely on those defects as a basis for summary judgment. Because waiver was dispositive, the court declined to reach the remaining issues and remanded for further proceedings.

The decision underscores two important lessons in Florida bad faith litigation: insurers must timely assert CRN deficiencies, and courts should carefully distinguish between statutory notice requirements and the ultimate merits of a bad faith claim.