A Florida court recently ruled against Citizens Property Insurance Corporation in a case involving a dispute over an appraisal request. The Third District Court of Appeal issued its opinion on June 17, 2026, affirming a lower court's decision that denied Citizens' motion to compel an appraisal. This ruling affects policyholders who rely on insurance companies to follow the terms of their policies when filing claims.
The case centers around Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, a state-run insurer, and Elizabeth Diaz, the insured party. The dispute arose after Diaz filed a claim for damages covered under her homeowner's insurance policy. Citizens sought to compel an appraisal to determine the amount of the loss but was met with a challenge regarding the compliance of its appraisal request with the policy's requirements.
The case reached the Third District Court of Appeal after Citizens appealed a non-final order from the County Court for Miami-Dade County. The lower court, presided over by Judge Gordon Murray, ruled against Citizens on May 6, 2025, stating that the insurance company had failed to meet the clear requirements outlined in the homeowner's insurance policy.
The court ruled that Citizens' written demand for appraisal, submitted on July 30, 2024, did not comply with the stipulation that such a demand must include an estimate of the amount in dispute. The court stated, "Citizens’s July 30, 2024 written demand for appraisal to its insureds failed to comply with the subject insurance policy’s requirement that its appraisal demand include an estimate supporting its position with respect to the underlying dispute between the parties." This highlights the importance of adhering to the specific terms of an insurance policy when seeking an appraisal.
The judges involved in this ruling were Chief Judge Scales and Judges Lindsey and Gordo. The court emphasized that the right to an appraisal is created by the insurance policy, and both parties must fulfill their contractual obligations before the appraisal process can be triggered. The court also noted that Citizens sought an advisory opinion regarding the interplay between the appraisal provision and the statutory requirement for insurers to respond to a notice of intent to initiate litigation. However, the court declined to address this issue, stating that it was not presented at the trial court level.
This ruling has significant implications for both insurance companies and policyholders. It reinforces the necessity for insurers to comply with the specific requirements set forth in their policies when requesting appraisals. This decision may serve as a precedent for future cases where insurers attempt to compel appraisals without meeting the necessary contractual obligations.
Moving forward, this case may influence how insurance companies handle appraisal requests and the importance of clear communication with policyholders. It underscores the rights of insured individuals to expect their insurance providers to adhere to the terms of their policies, ensuring fair treatment in the claims process.
As for the next steps, Citizens Property Insurance Corporation may consider appealing this decision to a higher court. However, details regarding any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case may also affect other pending cases involving similar disputes over appraisal requests and insurance policy compliance.