Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 631.61 (2025)
Nonduplication of recovery.
✓ 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
631.61 Nonduplication of recovery.—
(1) Any person having a claim against an insurer under any provision in an insurance policy other than a policy of an insolvent insurer which is also a covered claim, shall not be required to exhaust first her or his rights under such a policy. Any amount payable on a covered claim under this part shall be reduced by the amount of any recovery under such insurance policy.
(2) Any person having a claim which may be recovered under more than one insurance guaranty association or its equivalent shall seek recovery first from the association of the place of residence of the insured, except that if it is a first-party claim for damage to property with a permanent location, the person shall seek recovery first from the association of the location of the property, and if it is a workers’ compensation plan, the person shall seek recovery first from the association of the residence of the claimant. Any recovery under this part shall be reduced by the amount of recovery from any other insurance guaranty association or its equivalent.
History.—s. 12, ch. 70-20; s. 119, ch. 79-40; s. 809(1st), ch. 82-243; ss. 187, 188, ch. 91-108; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s. 413, ch. 97-102.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1986–1988 · leading case: Florida Ins. Guar. Ass'n v. Giordano, 485 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).
Florida Ins. Guar. Ass'n v. Giordano, 485 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). “Because the insured was an Illinois resident, however, and because Illinois has an insurance guaranty association also, the plaintiff and the insured were directed by section 631.61(2), Florida Statutes (1979), to seek payment first from IGF and then the balance from FIGA.”
Salisbury v. Chestnut Off. Equip. Co., 28 Fla. Supp. 2d 52 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1988). “FIGA argues that it is entitled to the set off due to the “non- *54 duplication of recovery” provisions set forth in Section 631.61, Florida Statutes (1987); further, that the workers’ compensation insurer does not have a “covered claim” due to the bar against subrogation set…”
Guardian Detective & Sec. Agency v. Schreyer, 489 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). “Pursuant to section 631.61, Florida Statutes (1985), any amount payable on this claim shall be reduced by the amount of any recovery under another insurance policy.”
— 631.61(2) — 1 case
Florida Ins. Guar. Ass'n v. Giordano, 485 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). “Because the insured was an Illinois resident, however, and because Illinois has an insurance guaranty association also, the plaintiff and the insured were directed by section 631.61(2), Florida Statutes (1979), to seek payment first from IGF and then the balance from FIGA.”
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.