What happened: Florida's Sixth District Court of Appeal ruled that an insurer's timely payment of a policy-limits appraisal award did not constitute a confession of judgment
Who's involved: Safepoint Insurance Company and a Hurricane Ian homeowner
What's at stake: Attorney's fees following a policy-limits payout of roughly $200,000
Why it matters: Insurers that accept coverage, follow appraisal, and pay on time are shielded from confession-of-judgment fee claims - even when the policyholder sues mid-process
Where it stands: Affirmed by Florida's Sixth District Court of Appeal on October 2, 2026
A Hurricane Ian homeowner collected policy limits from his insurer - then lost the fight for attorney's fees he never needed to chase.
Florida's Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment for Safepoint Insurance Company on October 2, 2026, finding no confession of judgment - the doctrine treating an insurer's payment after litigation as an admission it should have paid sooner.
After Hurricane Ian damaged the homeowner's property in Lee County, Safepoint inspected, accepted coverage, and paid roughly $200,000. The homeowner filed a statutory notice of intent to sue, seeking more than $200,000 in additional damages and $10,000 in fees. Safepoint invoked the policy's appraisal clause. Both sides appointed appraisers on time and agreed on an umpire.
Then the clock became the issue. The appraisal ran past ninety days - the window after which Florida's pre-suit statute, section 627.70152 (since repealed), allowed the homeowner to sue. He filed for breach of contract while appraisal was still running.
The umpire came back with a policy-limits award. Safepoint paid within sixty days, exactly as the policy required. The homeowner's own appraiser confirmed the delay came down to the umpire's post-hurricane workload.
Nobody was dragging their feet.
The homeowner argued Safepoint's post-suit payment triggered the confession of judgment doctrine, entitling him to fees under Florida law.
Five Florida district courts had already answered that question. The doctrine requires the policyholder to have been forced to sue. Safepoint accepted coverage from the start. The lawsuit did not push it to do anything it was not already doing.
The court agreed - and went further. The ninety-day window allowed suit. It did not require it, and it did not set a deadline for the appraisal itself.
Since Safepoint chose appraisal rather than making a settlement offer, the homeowner argued the insurer's "presuit settlement offer" should be treated as zero - maximizing fees under the statutory formula.
The statute gave insurers a choice: make a settlement offer or require appraisal. "Or" meant one or the other. Safepoint chose appraisal. It owed no offer.
All three judges agreed.
For property claims teams handling catastrophe books, the takeaway is practical: an insurer that accepts coverage, follows appraisal, and pays the award on time holds strong ground against fee claims - even when a policyholder sues mid-process.
