Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 627.635 (2025)
Excess insurance.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
627.635 Excess insurance.—
(1) No provision of this chapter shall be deemed to prohibit an insurer from issuing a health insurance policy as, or including in a policy a provision providing for, excess insurance; that is, to the effect that the insurer’s liability for benefits payable on account of expense incurred for any hospitalization, medical, surgical, and other services resulting from covered sickness or injury of the insured shall be limited to that part of that expense, if any, which is in excess of all benefits payable on account thereof by the same insurer under any other policy or policies covering the same insured and by all other insurers and service organizations by whom benefits are payable as to the same such expense.
(2) Any excess insurance policy, or any policy containing any excess insurance provision, shall have imprinted or stamped conspicuously upon the face thereof the designation “excess insurance” or appropriate words of similar import approved by the office.
History.—s. 578, ch. 59-205; ss. 13, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 1, ch. 77-457; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 484, 497, 809(2nd), ch. 82-243; s. 79, ch. 82-386; s. 114, ch. 92-318; s. 1149, ch. 2003-261.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1973–1988 · leading case: Brown v. Gulf Life Ins. Co., 343 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).
Brown v. Gulf Life Ins. Co., 343 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). “He contended that the above provision renders the policy "excess insurance" within the purview of Section 627.635, Florida Statutes (1975) [1] and that Gulf Life failed to comply *93 with section (2) thereof by failing to stamp conspicuously upon the face of the policy the…”
Repub. Nat'l Life Ins. v. Hiatt, 400 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “Hiatt asserted that paragraph B(2) was unenforceable because this provision rendered the policy “excess insurance” within the purview of Section 627.635, Florida Statutes (1975) 1 and since the policy did not comply with Section 627.”
Christian v. Colonial Penn Ins. Co., 537 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). “Section 627.635, Florida Statutes (1985) permits, with certain express conditions, an excess insurance provision in a health insurance policy.”
Jonas v. Cent. Life Assurance Co., 528 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). “Therefore, the insurer was not required to insert the words “excess insurance” on the face of the policy as required by section 627.635, Florida Statutes. The policy provided for payment of 80% of the first ,000 of covered expenses, and 100% of covered expenses in excess of…”
Clements v. Connecticut Gen. Life Ins., 40 Fla. Supp. 121 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Miami-Dade Cty. 1973). “Plaintiff first alleges that defendant’s reduction of its policy benefits as set forth above violates Florida Statute §627.635. This statute provides as follows — (1) No provision of this chapter shall be deemed to prohibit an insurer from issuing a policy as, or including in a…”
— 627.635(1) — 2 cases
Brown v. Gulf Life Ins. Co., 343 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). “He contended that the above provision renders the policy "excess insurance" within the purview of Section 627.635, Florida Statutes (1975) [1] and that Gulf Life failed to comply *93 with section (2) thereof by failing to stamp conspicuously upon the face of the policy the…”
Repub. Nat'l Life Ins. v. Hiatt, 400 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “Hiatt asserted that paragraph B(2) was unenforceable because this provision rendered the policy “excess insurance” within the purview of Section 627.635, Florida Statutes (1975) 1 and since the policy did not comply with Section 627.”
— 627.635(2) — 1 case
Repub. Nat'l Life Ins. v. Hiatt, 400 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “Hiatt asserted that paragraph B(2) was unenforceable because this provision rendered the policy “excess insurance” within the purview of Section 627.635, Florida Statutes (1975) 1 and since the policy did not comply with Section 627.”
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.