Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal says insurers can’t use new laws to escape attorney’s fees on property claims tied to older policies.
The case, decided August 28, 2025, revolves around a dispute between homeowner Denise Blumberg and Security First Insurance Company. In March 2022, Blumberg purchased a one-year property insurance policy from Security First. That summer, her property suffered damage covered by the policy. When Security First declined to pay the full amount of her claim, Blumberg filed a breach-of-contract lawsuit in July 2023. The parties eventually settled the underlying claim, but left the issue of attorney’s fees unresolved.
Blumberg’s request for attorney’s fees was based on the version of Florida law in effect when she bought her policy. At that time, Florida Statute section 627.428 allowed policyholders who prevailed in court against their insurer to recover attorney’s fees. However, between the time of Blumberg’s loss and the filing of her lawsuit, the Florida Legislature amended and repealed key provisions of the law, ultimately eliminating the insured’s right to attorney’s fees in property insurance disputes. Security First argued that since the new law was in effect by the time Blumberg filed her suit, she was no longer entitled to recover those fees.
The trial court sided with Security First, denying Blumberg’s motion for attorney’s fees. But Blumberg appealed, contending that the right to attorney’s fees was a substantive part of her insurance contract and that the legislative changes shouldn’t apply retroactively.
On appeal, the Fifth District Court of Appeal took a close look at the timing and substance of the statutory changes. The court relied on established Florida Supreme Court precedent, which holds that rights incorporated into an insurance contract – like the right to attorney’s fees – are governed by the law in effect when the policy is issued, not by later legislative changes. The appellate judges found no clear evidence that lawmakers intended the new rules to apply retroactively. As a result, they ruled that Blumberg’s right to attorney’s fees remained intact, reversing the lower court’s decision and sending the case back to determine the appropriate fee award.
For mortgage professionals, this ruling is a reminder that insurance contract terms and statutory rights in effect at the time a policy is issued remain binding, even if the law changes later. This could impact how mortgage lenders and servicers evaluate risk on properties with existing insurance policies, especially in Florida’s evolving regulatory environment.
The case also highlights the importance of reviewing policy language and understanding how statutory rights are woven into insurance contracts. For mortgage professionals involved in property transactions, claims, or servicing, the message is clear: don’t assume that new laws will automatically apply to existing policies, especially when it comes to attorney’s fees and other substantive rights.
It’s worth noting that the decision is not yet final, as further motions could still be filed. But for now, lenders, servicers, and their legal teams should take this as a cue to review their exposure on older policies and consider how similar disputes might play out in the wake of this appellate ruling.
As the real estate and mortgage industries continue to navigate a shifting regulatory landscape, this case serves as a timely reminder that the fine print – and the timing – still matter.
