DR. GARY BORAKS, LLC A/A/O RUNNELL D. CURRY v. FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION
Docket 6D2024-2504
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Florida
- Court
- District Court of Appeal of Florida
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Civil
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Docket
- 6D2024-2504
Appeal from the County Court for Orange County reviewing a judgment on claims against the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association.
Summary
The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment in a dispute between Dr. Gary Boraks, LLC (as assignee of Runnell D. Curry) and the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association (FIGA). The court held that FIGA is not generally liable for attorney’s fees under section 627.428 and may only be assessed fees under the limited exception in section 631.70 when FIGA affirmatively denies a covered claim other than by delay. The court relied on statutory text and precedent limiting FIGA’s obligations to policy limits (up to statutory caps), interest as provided, and attorney’s fees only in that narrow circumstance.
Issues Decided
- Whether the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association is subject to attorney's fees under section 627.428 when paying a covered claim.
- Whether FIGA may be awarded attorney's fees only when it denies a covered claim by affirmative action other than delay under section 631.70.
Court's Reasoning
The court relied on the statutory language of section 631.70, which expressly excludes application of section 627.428's attorney-fee provisions to FIGA claims except when FIGA affirmatively denies a covered claim other than by delay. Precedent such as Jones v. Florida Insurance Guaranty Association interpreted FIGA's liability to be capped at the insolvent insurer's policy limits (up to statutory maximums), with interest and attorney's fees available only under the limited statutory exception. Those authorities and the statute compelled affirmance.
Authorities Cited
- Section 631.70, Florida Statutes (2020)§ 631.70, Fla. Stat. (2020)
- Jones v. Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, Inc.908 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 2005)
- Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, Inc. v. Waterfire Restoration, LLC427 So. 3d 996 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
Parties
- Appellant
- Dr. Gary Boraks, LLC a/a/o Runnell D. Curry
- Appellee
- Florida Insurance Guaranty Association
- Judge
- Amanda S. Bova
- Attorney
- Chad A. Barr
- Attorney
- Dalton L. Gray
- Attorney
- Megan G. Colter
- Attorney
- Dorothy DiFiore
- Attorney
- Richard B. Bush
- Attorney
- Dylan J. Hall
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-04-17
- Lower tribunal case opening year
- 2017-01-01
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider motion for rehearing
If a party believes there are grounds, they should file a timely motion for rehearing in the Sixth District before the rehearing deadline expires.
- 2
Evaluate entitlement to fees
If not already resolved, assess whether FIGA ever affirmatively denied coverage other than by delay to determine if attorney's fees can be pursued under section 631.70.
- 3
Consult appellate counsel about further review
If a party wants to press the issue, consult counsel about seeking discretionary review from the Florida Supreme Court and the likelihood of acceptance.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The court affirmed that FIGA generally is not liable for attorney's fees under the insurer-fee statute and that fees can be awarded against FIGA only if FIGA affirmatively denies a covered claim other than by delay.
- Who does this affect?
- Claimants and assignees seeking payment from FIGA and counsel representing them, because FIGA's exposure to attorney's fees is limited by statute and precedent.
- What happens next for the parties?
- The appellate judgment stands unless a timely motion for rehearing is filed; the underlying remedies remain limited to policy limits, interest, and narrowly available attorney's fees.
- Can this decision be appealed further?
- A party could seek review by the Florida Supreme Court, subject to that court’s discretionary jurisdiction, but no further appeal is automatic.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Case No. 6D2024-2504
Lower Tribunal No. 2017-SC-012560
_____________________________
DR. GARY BORAKS, LLC a/a/o RUNNELL D. CURRY,
Appellant,
v.
FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION,
Appellee.
_____________________________
Appeal from the County Court for Orange County.
Amanda S. Bova, Judge.
April 17, 2026
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See § 631.70, Fla. Stat. (2020) (“The provisions of s[ection]
627.428 providing for an attorney’s fee shall not be applicable to any claim presented
to the [Florida Insurance Guaranty Association] under the provisions of this part,
except when [FIGA] denies by affirmative action, other than delay, a covered claim
or a portion thereof.” (emphasis added)); Jones v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n, Inc., 908
So. 2d 435, 438, 453 (Fla. 2005) (“With regard to permissible damages in a duty to
defend action, we hold that FIGA’s liability shall not exceed the policy limits of the
insolvent insurer (up to the statutory maximum), plus interest from the date of
judgment against the insured (if the payment of such interest is provided for under
the policy’s supplementary payment provision), as well as statutory interest from the
date of judgment against FIGA and any attorneys’ fees resulting from FIGA’s denial
of coverage. . . . Attorney’s fees may . . . be awarded pursuant to section 631.70 of
the Florida Statutes when FIGA denies a covered claim by affirmative action other
than delay. . . . [T]he proper award of damages in the instant matter could have only
been a base award of [the policy limit of the insolvent insurer (up to the statutory
maximum)], commensurate with [the insolvent insurer’s] limit of liability in the
underlying policy, plus interest on that amount as provided under the policy’s
supplementary payment provision, and statutory interest from the date of the
judgment against FIGA until payment along with attorney fees due to FIGA’s denial
of coverage.” (citations omitted) (emphasis added)); see generally Fla. Ins. Guar.
Ass’n, Inc. v. Waterfire Restoration, LLC, 427 So. 3d 996, 998 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
(“FIGA is not obligated to pay attorneys’ fees to the same extent as an insurer . . . .”
(citing § 631.70, Fla. Stat.)); SFR Servs., LLC v. Fla. Dep’t of Fin. Servs. o/b/o
Avatar Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 412 So. 3d 179, 180 n.4 (Fla. 6th DCA 2025) (“[T]he
attorney’s fees provisions of section 627.428 are not ‘applicable to any claim
presented to [FIGA],’ with a limited exception.” (second alteration in original)
(quoting § 631.70, Fla. Stat.)); § 631.51(1), Fla. Stat. (stating that one of the statutory
2
“purposes” of the FIGA statute is to “[p]rovide a mechanism for the payment of
covered claims under certain insurance policies to avoid excessive delay in payment
and to avoid financial loss to claimants or policyholders because of the insolvency
of an insurer”). 1
SMITH, BROWNLEE and PRATT, JJ., concur.
Chad A. Barr and Dalton L. Gray, of the Law Office of Chad A. Barr, P.A.,
Altamonte Springs, for Appellant.
Megan G. Colter and Dorothy DiFiore, of Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A.,
Tampa, Richard B. Bush, of Bush & Augpsurger, P.A., Tallahassee, and Dylan J.
Hall, of Bush & Augpsurger, P.A., Orlando, for Appellee.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING
AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
Sections 627.428 and 631.70, Florida Statutes, were repealed effective
1
March 24, 2023. See ch. 2023-15, §§ 11, 24, 31, Laws of Fla.
3