St. Pierre v. State Farm — Fifth DCA Confirms Section 627.70152 Notice Requirement Does Not Apply Retroactively

Case
Ronald St. Pierre and Beth St. Pierre v. State Farm Florida Insurance Company
Court
Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Date Decided
2026-05-29
Docket No.
5D2024-0705
Judge(s)
Harris, J., Jay, C.J., and Edwards, J.
Topics
Homeowner’s Insurance, Notice Requirement, Section 627.70152, Retroactivity
Source
Full opinion on CourtListener · PDF

Background

Ronald and Beth St. Pierre filed a complaint against State Farm Florida Insurance Company for breach of their homeowner’s insurance policy. State Farm moved to dismiss, arguing the St. Pierres failed to comply with the notice requirement under section 627.70152, Florida Statutes—a statutory pre-suit notice provision applicable to property insurance claims. The trial court granted the dismissal.

On appeal, the St. Pierres argued that section 627.70152 cannot be retroactively applied to an insurance policy issued before the statute’s enactment date.

The Court’s Holding

The Fifth DCA reversed, citing its own prior holding in Smith v. Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Co., 396 So. 3d 860 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024), which established that the notice requirement in section 627.70152 does not apply retroactively to policies issued before the statute took effect. Because the St. Pierres’ policy predated the statute, the notice requirement could not serve as a basis for dismissal.

Key Takeaways

  • The pre-suit notice requirement of section 627.70152 does not apply retroactively to homeowner’s insurance policies issued before the statute’s enactment.
  • Insurers cannot invoke section 627.70152 to dismiss claims arising from pre-enactment policies, even if the claim is filed after the statute’s effective date.
  • The Fifth DCA’s position on this issue is now well-established through multiple decisions.

Why It Matters

Florida’s property insurance reform legislation has generated extensive litigation over which claims are subject to new pre-suit requirements. This decision reinforces that the retroactivity bar protects policyholders with pre-enactment policies from dismissal for failure to comply with notice procedures that did not exist when their policies were issued. For insurance defense practitioners, attempts to dismiss on section 627.70152 grounds require confirmation that the policy was issued after the statute’s effective date. For plaintiffs’ counsel, this ruling provides clear authority to defeat such motions for older policies.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top