627.607
Time limit on certain defenses.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
627.607 Time limit on certain defenses.—
(1) The contract shall include the following provision:
“Time Limit on Certain Defenses: After 2 years from the issue date, only fraudulent misstatements in the application may be used to void the policy or deny any claim for loss incurred or disability starting after the 2-year period.”
(2) A policy may, in place of the provision set forth in subsection (1), include the following provision:
“Incontestable:
(a) Misstatements in the Application: After this policy has been in force for 2 years during the insured’s lifetime (excluding any period during which the insured is disabled), the insurer cannot contest the statements in the application.
(b) Preexisting Conditions: No claim for loss incurred or disability starting after 2 years from the issue date will be reduced or denied because a sickness or physical condition, not excluded by name or specific description before the date of loss, had existed before the effective date of coverage.”
History.—s. 550, ch. 59-205; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 1, ch. 77-457; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 456, 497, 809(2nd), ch. 82-243; s. 79, ch. 82-386; ss. 56, 114, ch. 92-318.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case: Kaufman v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co.
Kaufman v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. (1996)
“See § 627.607, Fla. Stat. (1989). [2] The statute states: 627.”
In re Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co. Mktg. & Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig. (2017)
“" Fla. Stat. Ann. § 627.607 (3)(a). Florida federal courts interpreting this statute have ruled that plaintiffs need not give notice to a product's manufacturer, because the statute requires only seller notification.”
Paul Revere Life Insurance Co. v. Damus (2003)
“ERMA argued that Paul Revere could not deny coverage under the policy’s incontestability clause, pursuant to section 627.607, Florida Statutes (2002), because the policy had been in force for over two years when it filed the disability claim.”
North Miami General Hosp. v. Central Nat. Life Ins. Co. (1982)
“However, no evidence was offered to show whether the ulnar nerve palsy was due to the same or related causes as the kyphosis.”
Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States v. Thomas E. Bell (1994)
“2 (West 1993); Fla.Stat.Ann. § 627.607(1), (2) (West 1984 & 1994 Supp.”
Stewart v. Midland Life Ins. Co. (2005)
“See § 627.607, Fla. Stat. (2001). Following her husband's death, Stewart submitted a completed proof of loss form [1] together with a certified copy of the death certificate, an authorization for the release of medical records, and the original policy of life insurance.”
DiFranco v. NAT. FOUND. LIFE INS. CO. (1989)
“607, Florida Statutes (1987), clearly precludes the defendant from raising the affirmative defense that the plaintiffs failed to fully and completely disclose the prior medical treatment and history of the plaintiff Peter DiFranco. (Fourth Affirmative Defense of defendant's…”
Paul Revere Life Insurance v. McPhee (2001)
“See Fla.Stat. § 627.607. 1 In addition to the required incontestability/preexisting conditions clause, the policies contain an additional provision regarding preexisting conditions: Preexisting Condition During the first two years from the date of issue, we will not pay benefits…”
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. M.D. Fred A. Liebowitz (2023)
“One such requirement, pertinent to this litigation, is Fla. Stat. § 627.607 (1), which requires the following provision: “Time Limit on Certain Defenses: After 2 years from the issue date, only fraudulent misstatements in the application may be used to void the policy or deny…”
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Liebowitz (2022)
“One such requirement, pertinent to this litigation, is Fla. Stat. § 627.607 (1), which requires the following provision: “Time Limit on Certain Defenses: After 2 years from the issue date, only fraudulent misstatements in the application may be used to void the policy or deny…”
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Liebowitz (2022)
“” “Where the language an insurance company chooses in its insurance application shifts the focus from a determination of truth or falsity of an applicant’s statements 10 The original Policy language did not strictly conform with Fla. Stat. § 627.607 (1). (See Pl. Ex. 1, p.”
— 627.607(1) — 4 cases
Kaufman v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. (1996)
“See § 627.607, Fla. Stat. (1989). [2] The statute states: 627.”
Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States v. Thomas E. Bell (1994)
“2 (West 1993); Fla.Stat.Ann. § 627.607(1), (2) (West 1984 & 1994 Supp.”
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Liebowitz (2022)
“” “Where the language an insurance company chooses in its insurance application shifts the focus from a determination of truth or falsity of an applicant’s statements 10 The original Policy language did not strictly conform with Fla. Stat. § 627.607 (1). (See Pl. Ex. 1, p.”
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. M.D. Fred A. Liebowitz (2023)
“One such requirement, pertinent to this litigation, is Fla. Stat. § 627.607 (1), which requires the following provision: “Time Limit on Certain Defenses: After 2 years from the issue date, only fraudulent misstatements in the application may be used to void the policy or deny…”
— 627.607(2) — 2 cases
Kaufman v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. (1996)
“See § 627.607, Fla. Stat. (1989). [2] The statute states: 627.”
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Liebowitz (2022)
“One such requirement, pertinent to this litigation, is Fla. Stat. § 627.607 (1), which requires the following provision: “Time Limit on Certain Defenses: After 2 years from the issue date, only fraudulent misstatements in the application may be used to void the policy or deny…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.