Kelley Kronenberg Partner Austin Miniard secured a significant ruling in the County Court of the Fourth Judicial Circuit in Clay County, Florida, on behalf of the insurer in a first-party property breach of contract action. 

The plaintiffs filed suit seeking damages arising from a water loss claim, with total exposure estimated well-over $110,000.00. During litigation, the insurer filed a proposal for settlement that included a requirement that the mortgagee be listed as the first payee on any settlement check, consistent with the policy’s mortgage clause, which expressly named the mortgagee as having an interest in any loss payable under Coverage A. 

The plaintiffs moved to strike the proposal for settlement, arguing the mortgagee payment requirement was an impermissible nonmonetary term. In the alternative, they sought an extension of time to respond. Austin successfully argued that the provision was a monetary term, not a nonmonetary one, and was therefore permissible as a matter of law. The Court agreed, relying on reasoning analogous to the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Town of Jupiter v. Sally Armes and rejecting the plaintiffs’ reliance on Koppel v. Ochoa as inapplicable to the facts of the case. 

The Court denied both the motion to strike and the motion for extension of time, finding the plaintiffs had presented no justifiable cause for additional time to consider the proposal. The PFS was deemed expired as of January 15, 2026. 

This ruling carries significant statewide implications. By affirming that a PFS requirement to include a mortgagee as the first listed payee is a permissible monetary term, the Court has established new precedent that strengthens the use of proposals for settlement in first-party property cases involving mortgaged properties across Florida. 

Learn more about the firm’s First-Party Property and Coverage Division: click here. 

Read our First-Party Property newsletter: https://www.kelleykronenberg.com/category/newsletter/