Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...The Act specifically provides that an "individual may recover actual damages, plus attorney's fees and court costs." § 501.211(2). The Act, however only allows recovery of damages related to the property which was the subject of the consumer transaction. § 501.212(3)....

...on and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade" to be unlawful. Fla.Stat. ง 501.204. FPL has moved to dismiss the claims under the "Little FTC Act", contending that it is exempt from the Act under its terms. Fla.Stat. ง 501.212 provides: This part does not apply to: (5) Any person or activity regulated under laws administered by . . . the Florida Public Service Commission . . . The Cities respond that the exemption in Section 501.212 is not applicable to the claims at bar because these claims arise from FPL's sale of wholesale power, an activity not regulated by the Florida Public Service Commission....

...ges, plus attorney's fees and court costs." § 501.211(2). It limited such damages, however, to "the property that is the subject of the consumer transaction" and specifically excluded claims for personal injury or death or damage to other property. § 501.212(3)....

...We also point out that in 1993 the legislature amended some of these provisions. Ch. 93-38, § 1, at 207 (amending § 501.202); § 2, at 207-209 (amending § 501.203); § 3, at 209 (amending § 501.204); § 11, at 212 (amending § 501.2105); § 12, at 212 (amending § 501.211); § 13, at 212 (amending § 501.212), Laws of Fla....

...amages in this Court for personal injuries. Since the Act explicitly states that it does not apply to "[a] claim for personal injury or death or a claim for damage to property other than the property that is the subject of the consumer transaction" [§ 501.212(3) Fla.Stat....

...rienced), a statutory limitation on such "actual" damages is that FDUTPA "does not apply to [a] claim for personal injury or death or a claim for damage to property other than the property that is the subject of the consumer transaction." Fla. Stat. § 501.212(3)....

...Badcock's argument that the DUTPA claims raised by plaintiffs are not maintainable as a class action is based on the following assertions: (1) the conduct at issue involves insurance; (2) the DUTPA does not apply to activity regulated by the Department of Insurance, see § 501.212(4), Fla.Stat.; and (3) the TILA does not prohibit the holder of an automatically perfected purchase money security interest from charging a fee for non-filing insurance, therefore, Badcock did not violate the TILA by charging a non-filing fee in lieu of filing a financing statement....

...erce. *782 (3) To make state consumer protection and enforcement consistent with established policies of federal law relating to consumer protection. § 501.202, Fla.Stat. The parties or activities excluded from operation of the act are set forth in section 501.212, Florida Statutes, which states in part: This part does not apply to: .......

...Designation of the charge as a premium for credit insurance would have required Badcock to include it in the finance charge. See 15 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(5). In actual practice, Badcock included the charge in the amount financed. The Georgia and Louisiana cases cited by Badcock in support of its contention that section 501.212 exempts plaintiffs' claims from operation of the deceptive and unfair trade practices act involve actions by an insured against an insurer....

...466, 482 (M.D.Fla.2003). It is well-established that FDUTPA does not apply to any acts or practices that are "required or specifically permitted by federal or state law." 3B TV. Inc. v. State, 794 So.2d 744, 747 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (quoting Fla. Stat. § 501.212(1)); see also Eirman v....

...FDUTPA also contains an exemption for insurance companies, providing that the statute does not apply "to any person or activity regulated under the laws administered by the former Department of Insurance which are now administered by the Department of Financial Services." Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(d). Because there is no dispute that American General is an insurance company as that term is defined under § 501.212(4)(d), there is no cause of action for violation of FDUTPA....

...tunity — i.e., publishing opportunities. A professional writer's loss of his ability to publish clearly constitutes an injury sufficient to permit him to resort to the injunctive remedies of the statute. The defendant also has argued that Fla.Stat. § 501.212(3) prevents the plaintiff from alleging a violation of the Act. Section 501.212(3) states that the Act does not apply to: A claim for personal injury or death or a claim for damage to property other than the property that is the subject of the consumer transaction. That section, however, does not prevent the plaintiff from adequately stating his claim. First, nothing in the language of § 501.212(3) appears to prevent a plaintiff from seeking an injunction to prevent the continued infringement of its trademark. General Time Corp., 1 U.S.P.Q.2d at n. 2. Moreover, even if this Court were to construe the language of § 501.212(3) to be applicable to the present situation, that section's plain language requires a conclusion that the Act applies to redress the injury alleged here....

...trademark name "Ed Anger." As the newspaper was selling the Ed Anger articles in the course of its business, the trademark property obviously was the subject of the consumer transaction involved here — the sale of the newspaper. *1481 As a result, § 501.212(3) would not preclude the plaintiff from obtaining his relief because that section implicitly provides that the Act applies where the damaged property is the subject of the consumer transaction. The section's language only prevents resort to the protections of the Act where the damage alleged is to property " other than the property that is the subject of the consumer transaction." Fla.Stat. § 501.212(3) (emphasis added)....

...As this Court recognized in LJS Co. v. Marks, 480 F.Supp. 241, 244 (S.D.Fla.1979), a private right of action for damages under the Act cannot be maintained unless the alleged unfair or deceptive acts or practices complained of involves a "consumer transaction", Fla.Stat. Ann. § 501.212(3), and, this Court further recognized that Florida Courts have strictly construed the definition of "consumer transaction"....

...nable acts or practices and never mentioned whether the equipment rental cost term was unconscionable or unfair. We address each issue separately. [2] THE ACT'S BANK EXEMPTIONS The trial court initially found that appellees were exempt from the Act. Section 501.212, Florida Statutes, provides: This part does not apply to: ....

...pon equipment failure, and an express waiver of defenses against assignees of rental agreements. The trial court determined that all of these terms are permitted by Florida law and therefore fall within a statutory exception to the scope of the Act. Section 501.212(1), Florida Statutes, exempts from liability acts or practices "required or specifically permitted by state or federal law." The purpose of the statute is obvious: it would be unacceptably inconsistent for one statute to penalize conduct mandated elsewhere....

...Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practice Act Claim (Count VI) Pacific Life moves to dismiss Plaintiffs' Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practice Act ("FDUTPA") claim "because the statute expressly precludes a cause of action against insurers." Mot. at 20. Plaintiffs bring no argument in response. FDUTPA § 501.212 states, "This part does not apply to ......

...(4) Any person or activity regulated under laws administered by; (a) The Office of Insurance Regulation of the Financial Services Commission; ... (d) Any person or activity regulated under the laws administered by the former Department of Insurance which are now administered by the Department of Financial Services," FDUTPA § 501.212....

...ral corporate taxes; pursuant to section 366.04, Florida Statutes (2006), 2 the Commission has exclusive ju *402 risdiction to adjudicate disputes and challenges regarding rates and charges that a public utility imposes on customers; and pursuant to section 501.212, Florida Statutes (2006), FDUTPA does not apply to “[a]ny activity regulated under laws administered by the [Commission].” Moreover, as to Count II, the Defendants argued, in part, that the second amended complaint fails to state...

...for money damages, in essence, the Plaintiff is seeking a refund of alleged overpayments made to FPL; (2) pursuant to section 366.04(1), the Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over matters regarding rates of public utilities; and (3) pursuant to section 501.212, FDUTPA does not apply to activities regulated by the Commission....

...ed complaint with prejudice. 2. Is FDUTPA applicable to claim asserted against FPL? As we have concluded that the Commission has exclusive jurisdiction under section 366.04(1), we find that the trial court also properly dismissed Count I pursuant to section 501.212(5), which provides that FDUTPA does not apply to “[a]ny activity regulated under laws administered by the Florida Public Service Commission.” B....

...FDUTPA does not apply to “[a]ny person or activity regulated under laws administered by ... [t]he Office of Insurance Regulation of the Financial Services Commission; or ... regulated under the laws administered by the ... Department of Financial Services.” Fla. Stat. § 501.212 ....

...It is undisputed that the mobile home dealer, Aladdin Mobile Homes, was found to have violated the Act in its dealings with appellants. Reserve Insurance, the surety, contended below however that it could not be liable for appellants' attorney's fees because Section 501.212(5) of the Act provides that the Act does not apply to "any person or activity regulated under laws administered by the department of insurance ...", and the act of writing bonds was clearly an activity regulated by the Department of Insurance....

...iss Count I must be granted, and Count I is dismissed. B. Count II—Violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act Plaintiffs claim that Defendants are liable under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA"), § 501.212, Fla....

...ds put forth by Defendants warrant dismissing Plaintiffs' Count II claim under the FDUTPA. First, Plaintiffs argue that the exemption in the FDUTPA for banks does not apply because Defendants were acting as a broker of securities, not as a bank. See § 501.212(4)(b)-(c), Fla....

...f a violation of the FDUTPA. Fla. Stat. § 501.211(2). A plaintiff, however, may not bring "[a] claim for personal injury or death or a claim for damage to property other than the property that is the subject of the consumer transaction." Fla. Stat. § 501.212(3)....

is the subject of the consumer transaction.” § 501.212(3), Fla. Stat. (2008). FDUTPA does not define

...GECC moves to dismiss the second cause of action of the Amended Complaint alleging a violation of the FDUTPA on the grounds that Sundance has failed to allege sufficient facts regarding GECC's involvement to sustain a cause of action, and because the claim is barred by Section 501.212, Florida Statutes, and by the applicable statute of limitations....

...Applicability of the FDUTPA to the Loan Agreement GECC also contends that even if Sundance were capable of alleging a claim under the FDUTPA, its claim would be barred as a matter of law because of a statutory exemption which applies to the Loan Agreement. Section 501.212(7)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that the FDUTPA does not apply to "[c]auses of action pertaining to commercial real property located in [Florida] if the parties to the action executed a written lease or contract that expressly provi...

...quential Damages and the application of Florida law." ( GECC's Motion to Dismiss Count II of Amended Complaint with Prejudice at 18). As a result, GECC argues that Sundance's claim falls squarely within the ambit of the FDUTPA exemption set forth in Section 501.212(7)(a), and should be dismissed....

...required elements of the FDUTPA exemption, however, the undersigned is not persuaded by GECC's argument. The FDUTPA exemption at issue requires "a written ... contract that expressly provides for the process of resolution of any dispute." Fla. Stat. § 501.212(7)(a) (emphasis added)....

...sole or even preferred process of dispute resolution agreed to by the parties. For instance, none of the cited provisions would prohibit the parties from seeking an alternative process for the resolution of the instant dispute, such as arbitration. Section 501.212(7)(a) requires that the written contract expressly provide for the process of resolution of any disputes....

...Basciano had no right to rely on it and the negligent misrepresentation claim must fail. Mr. Basciano's FDUTPA claim must fail as well. FDUTPA does not apply to banks and savings and loan associations regulated by the state or the federal government. See § 501.212(4), Fla. Stat. (2004). While recognizing that exemption, Mr. Basciano contends that Lennar is not *779 a bank protected by section 501.212(4), and, thus, falls within FDUTPA's scope....

...The trial court also granted Morse's motion for summary judgment on plaintiff's FDUTPA claim because plaintiff did not suffer any recoverable damages. Under FDUTPA section 501.211(2), Florida Statutes (1999), a consumer may recover "actual damages" but section 501.212(3) explains that FDUTPA does not apply to a "claim for personal injury or death or a claim for damage to property other than the property that is the subject of the consumer transaction." Although the term "property" is not defined in...

...value, wherever situated.... (9) "Thing of value" may include, without limitation, any moneys, donation, membership, credential, certificate, prize, award, benefit, license, interest, professional opportunity, or chance of winning. Based on sections 501.212(3) and 501.203(8) and (9), this court and other courts have held that section 501.211 "`entitles a consumer to recover damages attributable to the diminished value of the goods or services received, but does not authorize recovery of conseque...

...s on bottles and cans of Beck’s. The Florida and New York statutes contain safe harbor provisions. Florida law provides that FDUTPA does not apply to “[a]n act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law.” Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (1)....

...Premier Sales Grp., Inc., 480 F.3d 1281, 1284 (11th Cir.2007) (citation and quotations omitted). The “safe harbor” provision of the FDUTPA states that the Act “does not apply to an act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law.” Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (1)....

...rance began (August 24, 2010-August 24, 2011), which was a time period in which Plaintiff’s coverage was inadequate. (Doc. #2, ¶¶ 51-52). . Defendants argue that the FDUTPA does not apply to thrifts organized under federal law, citing Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(c) ("This part does not apply to ......

...1995), as we find the thorough analysis of this issue contained in Guice, Orman, and Dahl more persuasive. Finally, we affirm the dismissal of Eirman's complaint as to the count alleging an action under Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (the "Little FTC Act"). Section 501.212(1) exempts from its coverage "an act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law." Section 501.212(1), Fla....

...Plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim against Ever-Bank, therefore, fails. 6. Plaintiffs Cannot Maintain a FDUTPA Claim Against EverBank (Count V) By its express terms, FDUTPA “does not apply to ... [b]anks or savings and loan associations regulated by federal agencies.” See Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(c); Sovereign Bonds Exch....

...Helms Exterminators, Inc., 468 So.2d 451, 454 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). This is because "[t]he act is intended to protect a consumer from unfair or deceptive acts or practices which diminish the value or worth of the goods or services purchased by the consumer." Urling, 468 So.2d at 454. Section 501.212(3), Florida Statutes (2009), further provides that the act does not apply to "a claim for damage to property other than the property that is the subject of the consumer transaction." Accordingly, under FDUTPA, the term "actual damages" does not include special or consequential damages....

...y charged for insurance. Id. at 7. The loan and insurance originated from documents the plaintiff signed to assist in his stepdaughter's purchase of a car. Therefore, in that case, the "property that is the subject of the *181 consumer transaction," § 501.212(3), for which the plaintiff claimed a FDUTPA violation, was his obligation under the loan and the purchase of insurance....

...n."). Ms. Caban argues that Florida law precludes the arbitration of her FDUTPA claims, yet Chase is exempt from FDUPA, and these claims cannot survive in any forum. See Int'l Brokerage & Surplus Lines, Inc., 2007 WL 220172, at *9 (citing Fla. Stat. § 501.212(4))....

...ceptive act or unfair practice; (2) causation; and (3) actual damages. Rollins, Inc. v. Butland, 951 So.2d 860, 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). However, FDUTPA specifically precludes a plaintiff from bringing a claim for personal injury or death. Fla. Stat. § 501.212(3); see also Schauer v. Morse Operations, Inc., 5 So.3d 2, 6-7 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (citing Fla. Slat. § 501.212(3))....

permitted by federal or state law.” Fla. Stat. § 501.212(1). In Prohias v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals

...3B TV, Inc. appeals, and the State of Florida cross-appeals, a final judgment entered following a jury verdict which found that in transmitting via satellite its "Basil Basset Bingo" promotional game, 3B TV had committed an unfair act or practice under section 501.212, Florida Statutes (1997), the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (DUTPA)....

...lied by 515, the number of days the broadcasts were aired in Florida. 3B TV seeks reversal of the final judgment entered on the verdict arguing, in part, that its game was a valid game promotion and hence cannot constitute an unfair act or practice, section 501.212(1)....

...Application of DUTPA 3B TV argues that, because its broadcast is a lawful game promotion under Florida law, it cannot have constituted a violation of DUTPA. By its own terms, DUTPA does not apply to an "act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law." § 501.212(1), Fla. Stat.; see Eirman v. Olde Discount Corp., 697 So.2d 865, 866 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)(conduct alleged to be violation of DUTPA was authorized by rules of United States Securities & Exchange Commission, *748 thus DUTPA is inapplicable pursuant to section 501.212(1), Florida Statutes)....

...The last sentence of section 849.094(1)(a) expressly excludes bingo games from the game promotion safe harbor. As a result, if, on remand, it is determined that 3B TV's game constituted a bingo game under section 849.0931, section 849.094 will offer 3B TV no protection under section 501.212(1)....

...Office of Insurance Regulation of the Financial Services Commission” or “[a]ny person or activity regulated under the laws administered by the former Department of Insurance which are now administered by the Department of Financial Services.” § 501.212(4)(a), (d), Fla. Stat. (2011). Florida courts resolve questions about the applicability of section 501.212(4) by look *388 ing to the activity that is the subject of the lawsuit and determining whether the activity is subject to the regulatory authority of the Office of Insurance Regulation....

...purchased, however, it is not the business of insurance ... that is implicated” and finding that the plaintiffs complaint was plainly focused on the particulars of credit extension). We find Appellant’s reliance upon Dixie Finance Co. misplaced. Section 501.212(4) exempts from FDUTPA “[a]ny person or activity regulated under laws administered” by the Office of Insurance Regulation or the laws administered by the former Department of Insurance which are now administered by the Department of Financial Services....

...hich this chapter applies shall be issued through a licensed agent.” Not only do the foregoing provisions refute Appellant’s argument that Ap-pellees’ act of selling credit life and credit disability insurance is not exempted from FDUTPA under section 501.212(4), but Appellant’s counsel acknowledged during the hearing below that Appellee BBA “sells an insurance product.” In' addition, Appellees’ counsel provided the trial court with a copy of Appellees’ license to sell insurance....

...nsurance without authorization or disclosure. While Appellant is correct that section 520.02(7), Florida Statutes (2011), provides that GAP coverage is not insurance for purposes of the Florida Insurance Code and that, as a result, the exemptions in section 501.212(4) would not apply to the sale of the item, Exhibit G to the amended complaint included a SAFE-GAP Deficien *390 cy Waiver Addendum for one of Appellees’ customers....

...using such personal information as the personal information of another to collect a debt not owed. Doc. 47 at ¶ 64. The Plaintiff did not address the viability of this claim in her response to the motion to dismiss (Doc. 54). Pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 501.212(4)(d), the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Practices Act does not apply to insurance companies regulated under the laws administered by the former Department of Insurance, now the Department of Financial Services....

...Tenet Healthcare Corp., 420 F.Supp.2d 1288 (S.D.Fla.2005): It is well-established that FDUTPA does not apply to any acts or practices that are "required or specifically permitted by federal or state law." 3B TV. Inc. v. State, 794 So.2d 744, 747 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (quoting Fla. Stat. § 501.212(1)); see also Eirman v....

...d under law administered by ... [t]he Office of Insurance Regulation of the Financial Services Commission" or "any person or activity regulated under law administered by the ... Department of Financial Services" bars Dolan's FDUTPA claim. Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(a) & (d)....

...plaint and this action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, for two primary and independent reasons: 2. First, the conduct that Plaintiff challenges falls within the safe harbor of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA"), Fla. Stat. § 501.212(1), because the promotional and advertising activity attacked in the Complaint is supported by the FDA-approved labeling for Nexium® and thus is "specifically permitted" by federal law....

...raud statutes bar “any claims that *1345 are based on conduct compliant with, or permitted by, state or federal law or federal regulatory bodies.” (Motion 21-24 (citing Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 44-1523; Ark.Code Ann. § 4-88-101(1) & (3); Fla Stat. § 501.212(1); 815 Ill....

...[a] regulatory body or officer acting under statutory authority of this state or the United States.” ArkCode. Ann. § 4-88-101(1), (3). Florida: “This part does not apply to: (1) An act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law.” Fla Stat. § 501.212(1)....

...any person aggrieved by a violation of the statute may bring a claim under the FDUTPA. Id. at 1146. Defendants further argue that the FDUTPA "expressly does not apply to an `act or practice ... specifically permitted by federal ... law.' Fla. Stat. § 501.212(1)....

...ch damages were barred by a FDUTPA provision limiting actual damages in cases involving “personal injury or death or a claim for damage to property other than the property that is the subject of the consumer transaction.” Id. (quoting Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (3))....

...n for "[a]ny person or activity regulated under laws administered by ... [t]he Office of Insurance Regulation of the Financial Services Commission; or ... regulated under the laws administered by the ... Department of Financial Services." Fla. Stat. § 501.212 ....

...2015) (Moore, J.) ("Fraudulent conduct in the context of billing for PIP benefits qualifies as a deceptive act for purposes of FDUTPA.")). Again, the Court rejects Dr. Coll's contention that the conduct at issue here does not implicate FDUTPA. 4 Health & Wellness argues that, under Florida Statutes section 501.212(4)(a), State Farm, as an insurer, is precluded from pursuing a FDUTPA claim....

...dministered by the Office of Insurance Regulation of the Financial Services Commission," Carles Constr., Inc. v. Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. of Am. , 09-CV-23645, 2013 WL 12061474 , at *1 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 11, 2013) (Hoeveler, J.) (citing Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(a) ), courts within the Eleventh Circuit have repeatedly rejected this argument in the context presented here. Simply put, because the conduct of which State Farm complains in this case is "not a type regulated by the Office of Insurance Regulation, the exemption of Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(a) does not apply." State Farm Mut....

...o § 501, Fla. Stat. only.” (italics added). The MSA thus limited the plaintiffs entitlement to attorney’s fees to Chapter 501, which does not apply to entities—such as sureties—that are regulated by the Department of Financial Services. See § 501.212(4)(d), Fla....

...license, interest, professional opportunity, or chance of winning.” § 501.203(9), Fla. Stat. As the circuit court ruled, however, the FDUTPA does not apply to “[a]n act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law.” § 501.212(1), Fla....

...Dismissal of Count II was appropriate because the appellants did not allege facts to establish that assigning a matrix of services score was an act constituting “trade or commerce.” The FDUTPA does not apply to an “act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law” § 501.212(1), Fla....

...nd (v) Plaintiffs should not be allowed to pursue injunctive relief under FDUTPA. The Court addresses each contention in turn. 1. The “Insurance” Exemption to FDUTPA Claims Defendants argue that the statutory exemption set out in Florida Statute Section 501.212(4)(a) precludes Plaintiffs from pursuing a claim for violations of the FDUTPA. The Court rejects this contention. Addressing the same argument, the Eleventh Circuit has stated: The express language of Fla Stat. § 501.212(4)(a) creates a specific exemption from suit under FDUTPA for “[a]ny person or activity regulated under laws administered by ......

...Regulation. See W.S. Badcock Corp. v. Myers, 696 So.2d 776, 782-83 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1996). Because the conduct of which State Farm complains in this lawsuit 3 is not a type regulated by the Office of Insurance Regulation, the exemption of Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(a) does not apply....

...As to defendants D & W, GDW, Robb, Kreitner, and D'Alessandro, defendants Robb and Kreitner argue (and the remaining defendants join the argument) that plaintiffs' FDUTPA claims should be dismissed because the claims are statutorily *1259 precluded by § 501.212(6), which excludes the application of FDUTPA to, among other things, "[a]n act or practice involving the sale, lease, rental, or appraisal of real estate by a person licensed, certified, or registered pursuant to chapter 475, which act or practice violates § 475.42 or § 475.626." FLA. STAT. § 501.212(6)....

...Defendants claim that the statutory exclusion applies to them. The Second Amended Complaint and the record do not establish that any defendants are persons "licensed, certified, or registered pursuant to chapter 475," as required to invoke the statutory exemption set forth in § 501.212(6)....

...Second, Defendant argues that the case should be dismissed under the primary jurisdiction doctrine. Third, Defendant argues that, because of preemption and compliance with federal law, Plaintiffs FDUPTA allegations fall under the safe harbor provision of Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (1)....

...use of “natural” in food labels.”). See also [DE 32-1] (Letter from Michael M. Landa, Acting Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition to Judge Jerome B. Simandle dated September 16, 2010). III. Safe Harbor Provision of Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (1) Defendant argues that, because of preemption and compliance with federal law, Plaintiffs FDUPTA allegations fall under the safe harbor provision of Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (1). This statute states as follows: 501.212. Application This part does not apply to: (1) An act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law. Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (1)....

...Additionally, Plaintiffs FDUT-PA claims are subject to the Act’s safe harbor provision. Pursuant to the safe harbor provision, there is no liability under FDUTPA when the challenged action is specifically permitted under federal law. See Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (1)....

...porting implication of such private cause of action. In this suit, Plaintiff seeks damages for personal injuries. However, the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act does not apply to "[a] claim for personal injury or death...." Fla. Stat. § 501.212(3)(2008)....

...hat the disclosure statements were inaccurate in any respect. As a matter of Florida law—if not also federal law—Homecomings cannot be held liable for providing a disclosure statement with calculations that conform with federal law. See Fla. Stat. § 501.212(1) (stating that FDUTPA does not apply to an "act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law")....

...§ 501, Fla. Stat. only.” (italics added). The MSA thus limited the plaintiffs entitlement to attorney’s fees to Chapter 501, which does not apply to entities—such as sureties— that are regulated by the Department of Financial Services. See § 501.212(4)(d), Fla....

...�� attorney’s fees. Id. (emphasis added). Based on the statute and interpretive case law, we find that the trial court *729 erred in holding Safeco jointly and severally liable for any section 501.2105 attorney’s fees awarded against ANL because section 501.212(4)(d) specifically precludes application of any section within the FDUTPA statutes to sureties....

...arbitration.” Sitarik v. JFK Med. Ctr. Ltd., 11 So. 3d 973, 974 (Fla. 4th 2 The amended complaint does not specify what the Stankoses’ alleged “actual damages” are under the FDUTPA count. However, FDUTPA expressly excludes claims for personal injury or death. § 501.212(3), Fla....

...claim, it is the only argument addressed. Florida law provides the FDUTPA does not apply to “[a]ny person or activity regulated under laws administered by ... [b]anks or savings and loan associations regulated by federal agencies____” Fla. Stat. 501.212(4)(c); see also Bankers Trust Co....

...Marrache’s amended class action complaint with prejudice. First, Marrache’s FDUTPA claims are barred by FDUTPA’s safe harbor provision, which exempts acts or practices required or specifically permitted by federal or state law. See Fla. Stat. § 501.212....

...Defendants also ar- gued that Marrache failed to allege FDUTPA violations, including failing to adequately allege causation and actual damages, and that Marrache’s claims fell within FDUTPA’s safe harbor provision, which exempts acts or practices required or specifically permitted by federal or state law. See Fla. Stat. § 501.212....

...violations of sections 562.455 and 500.04 proscribe unfair, deceptive, or unconscionable acts or practices that qualify as FDUTPA violations because Mar- rache’s claims against Defendants fall under FDUTPA’s safe harbor provision. See Fla. Stat. § 501.212. Specifically, Florida Statute § 501.212(a) provides that FDUTPA does not apply to “[a]n act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law.” (emphasis added)....

...(“Defs.’ Mot.”) at 6-8; (2) State Farm’s interpretation of “lawfully provided” contravenes generally accepted standards of statutory interpretation and the intent of the legislature, id. at 9-11 ; (3) the statutory exemption set out in Florida Statutes Section 501.212(4)(a) precludes State Farm from pursuing a claim for violations of the FDUTPA, id....

...Auto. Ins. Co. v. Physicians Grp. of Sarasota, L.L.C., 9 F.Supp.3d 1303, 1312-13 (M.D.Fla.2014); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Kugler, 2011 WL 4389915 , at *12 (S.D.Fla.2011). Defendants argue that the statutory exemption set out in Florida Statute Section 501.212(4)(a) precludes State Farm from pursuing a claim for violations of the FDUTPA. The Court rejects this contention. Addressing the same argument, the Eleventh Circuit has stated: The express language of Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(a) creates a specific exemption from suit under FDUTPA for “[a]ny person or activity regulated under laws administered by ......

...ance Regulation. See W.S. Badcock Corp. v. Myers, 696 So.2d 776, 782-83 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Because the conduct of which State Farm complains in this lawsuit is not a type regulated by the Office of Insurance Regulation, the exemption of Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(a) does not apply....

...at 6-8; (2) State Farm’s interpretation of “lawfully provided,” as used in Florida’s No-Fault Law, contravenes generally accepted standards of statutory interpretation and the intent of the legislature, id. at 9-11 ; (3) the statutory exemption set out in section 501.212(4)(a), Florida Statutes, precludes State Farm from pursuing a claim for violations of the FDUTPA, id....

...And if Yucatan’s labeling practice is compliant with FDA standards, Plaintiff is much less likely to be able to state a claim for a traditional viola *1374 tion of FDUTPA because FDUTPA exempts from enforcement “[a]n act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law.” Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (1) (FDUTPA’s “safe harbor” provision)....

closing tactics and size representations. Section 501.212(7)(a), Florida Statutes (2015), exempts commercial

...§ 526.304(2)(b), Fla. Stat.; § 526.305(3), Fla. Stat. B. Florida Deceptive and Unfair Practices Act The Florida legislature included a safety provision within FDUTPA that exempts all actions which are specifically permitted by federal or state law. See § 501.212(1) Fla....

...that run afoul of the Act. Furmanite Am., Inc. v. T.D. Williamson, Inc., 506 F.Supp.2d *1313 1134, 1147 (M.D.Fla.2007); MJS Music, 2006 WL 1208015 at *2 (declaring that courts have applied an “extremely broad” concept of liability under FDUTPA). Section 501.212(4)(a), Florida Statutes, states that “[a]ny person or activity regulated under laws administered by ......

...Fla.Stat. § 501.202. More importantly, the statute specifically states -that it does not apply to “[a]ny person or activity regulated under laws administered by the Department of Insurance or the Florida Public Service Commission....” • Fla.Stat. § 501.212(5)....

...BOA contends that this claim must fail because as a federally-regulated bank it is exempted from FDUTPA liability. (Doc. 43, p. 21.) FDUTPA does not apply to "banks, credit unions, and savings and loan associations regulated by federal agencies." Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (4)(c)....

...(2009) ["FDUTPA"], claim brought against it by the respondents. We grant prohibition and remand the case with directions that this claim in the complaint be dismissed. [1] FPL is correct when it asserts that the circuit court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the FDUTPA claims. Section 501.212(5), Florida Statutes (2009), creates a specific exception from suit under that Act for "[a]ny activity regulated under laws administered by the Florida Public Service Commission." The Resident Building Envelope Program giving rise to...

...The trial court also dismissed Ms. Hotchkiss’s FDUTPA claim based on its finding that FDUTPA did not apply to BCBSF. The trial court correctly concluded that the statutory language contained in FDUTPA precluded Ms. Hotchkiss’s FDUTPA claim. Section 501.212(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2009), states that FDUTPA does not apply to any person or activity regulated by the 2 Office of Insurance Regulation (OIR)....

...to exclude those individuals who received a refund for their Etch purchase. Sonic also argues that individuals who purchased Etch on or after April 23, 2002, must be excluded from the class because those individuals cannot seek relief under FDUTPA. Section 501.212(4), Florida Statutes (2002), provides that FDUTPA does not apply to “[a]ny person or activity regulated under laws administered by the Department of Insurance.” 4 Section 634.121(1), Florida Statutes (2002), states that “[a] ser...

...The record reflects that the Department of Insurance investigated Sonic for conduct relating to its sale of Etch and that Sonic ultimately implemented the refund program, in *966 addition to other mitigation, pursuant to an agreement with the department. . Section 501.212(4) has since been amended to refer to laws administered by the Depart-men! of Financial Services instead of the Department of Insurance....

specifically permitted by federal or state law.” § 501.212(1), Fla. Stat. A merchant, such as BJ’s, is statutorily

...Thus, nominative fair use, not descriptive fair use, is the relevant “fair use” defense in this case. Accordingly, Ford is entitled to summary judgment on this issue. I. Actions Permitted The FDUTPA does not apply to an “act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law.” Fla. Stat. § 501.212 (1)....