Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 774.205 (2025)
Claimant proceedings.
✓ 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
774.205 Claimant proceedings.—
(1) A civil action alleging an asbestos or silica claim may be brought in the courts of this state if the plaintiff is domiciled in this state or the exposure to asbestos or silica that is a substantial contributing factor to the physical impairment of the plaintiff on which the claim is based occurred in this state.
(2) A plaintiff in a civil action alleging an asbestos or silica claim must include with the complaint or other initial pleading a written report and supporting test results constituting prima facie evidence of the exposed person’s asbestos-related or silica-related physical impairment meeting the requirements of s. 774.204(2), (3), (5), or (6). For any asbestos or silica claim pending on the effective date of this act, the plaintiff must file the report and supporting test results at least 30 days before setting a date for trial. The defendant must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to challenge the adequacy of the proffered prima facie evidence of asbestos-related impairment. The claim of the plaintiff shall be dismissed without prejudice upon a finding of failure to make the required prima facie showing.
(3) All asbestos claims and silica claims filed in this state on or after the effective date of this act must include, in addition to the written report described in subsection (2) and the information required by s. 774.207(2), a sworn information form containing the following information:
(a) The claimant’s name, address, date of birth, and marital status;
(b) If the claimant alleges exposure to asbestos or silica through the testimony of another person or alleges other than direct or bystander exposure to a product, the name, address, date of birth, and marital status for each person by which the claimant alleges exposure, hereinafter the “index person,” and the claimant’s relationship to each such person;
(c) The specific location of each alleged exposure;
(d) The beginning and ending dates of each alleged exposure as to each asbestos product or silica product for each location at which exposure allegedly took place for the plaintiff and each index person;
(e) The occupation and name of the employer of the exposed person at the time of each alleged exposure;
(f) The specific condition related to asbestos or silica claimed to exist; and
(g) Any supporting documentation of the condition claimed to exist.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2006–2024 · leading case: Batchelor v. Am. Optical Corp., 185 F. Supp. 3d 1358 (S.D. Fla. 2016).
Batchelor v. Am. Optical Corp., 185 F. Supp. 3d 1358 (S.D. Fla. 2016). “In his sworn exposure schedules, which were provided pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 774.205 , Plaintiff also indicates that he may have been exposed to asbestos while engaging in personal automotive work in Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Mississippi, and Florida.”
Dugas v. 3M Co., 101 F. Supp. 3d 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2015). “4 The argument advanced by Honeywell is that Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint should be dismissed for failure to comply with Section 774.205, Florida Statutes. Section 774.”
Am. Optical Corp. v. Spiewak, 73 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 2011). “Section 774.205(2), Florida Statutes (2010), provides that a plaintiff in a civil action alleging an asbestos claim must “include with the complaint or other initial pleading a written report and supporting test results constituting prima facie evidence of the exposed person’s…”
In Re Asbestos Litig., 933 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). “" See § 774.205(2), Fla. Stat. (2005). But as the majority has decided to interpret the statute with its advisory opinion, it may want to give further guidance.”
Mobil Corp. v. Mallia, 933 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). “In addition, section 774.205(2), Florida Statutes (2005), provides, in part, that: A plaintiff in a civil action alleging an asbestos or silica claim must include with the complaint or other initial pleading a written report and supporting test results constituting prima facie…”
Rhoades v. Allen-bradley Co. (E.D. Pa. 2024). “’ Fla. Stat. § 774.205 (2). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, on the other hand, only requires a complaint to include ‘a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief[.”
Constantinides v. CBS Corp., 747 F. Supp. 2d 488 (E.D. Pa. 2010). “(Asbestos and Silica Compensation Fairness Act, Fla. Stat. § 774.205 ). If defendant’s products are identified in a given case, “traditional” methods of finding causation apply.”
— 774.205(2) — 4 cases
Am. Optical Corp. v. Spiewak, 73 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 2011). “Section 774.205(2), Florida Statutes (2010), provides that a plaintiff in a civil action alleging an asbestos claim must “include with the complaint or other initial pleading a written report and supporting test results constituting prima facie evidence of the exposed person’s…”
In Re Asbestos Litig., 933 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). “" See § 774.205(2), Fla. Stat. (2005). But as the majority has decided to interpret the statute with its advisory opinion, it may want to give further guidance.”
Dugas v. 3M Co., 101 F. Supp. 3d 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2015). “4 The argument advanced by Honeywell is that Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint should be dismissed for failure to comply with Section 774.205, Florida Statutes. Section 774.”
Mobil Corp. v. Mallia, 933 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). “In addition, section 774.205(2), Florida Statutes (2005), provides, in part, that: A plaintiff in a civil action alleging an asbestos or silica claim must include with the complaint or other initial pleading a written report and supporting test results constituting prima facie…”
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.