FIOL
v.
AMERICAN SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that because the plaintiff sought only prospective declaratory relief, she lacked standing in federal court, and thus the court lacked jurisdiction.
Plaintiff filed a state court action seeking a declaratory judgment on whether her insurance policy covered a past loss. The defendant removed the cas…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Prospective Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
Vivian Fiol, Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 22-22717-Civ-Scola ) American Security Insurance ) Company, Defendant. )
Order This matter is before the Court on the parties’ joint motion to remand this case to state court. (ECF No. 6.) After careful consideration of the briefing, the record, and the relevant legal authorities, the Court grants the joint motion. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff Vivian Fiol initially filed this case in Florida state court on July 8, 2022, asserting one claim for declaratory judgment against Defendant American Security Insurance Company (“American Security”). (Not. of Removal, ECF No. 1, ¶ 1; Compl., ECF No. 1-4, ¶ 28.) The Plaintiff sought to have the Florida state court determine whether her property insurance policy covered a loss suffered during Hurricane Irma in 2017. (Compl., ¶¶ 4-6.) Defendant American Security removed this case from Florida state court on August 26, 2022, based on diversity jurisdiction. (Not. at ¶ 11.) Now, the Plaintiff and the Defendant jointly request that the Court remand the case to state court because the Plaintiff is “only . . . seeking declaratory relief.” (Jt. Mot. to Remand, ECF No. 6, at ¶ 2.) Because the Plaintiff seeks only prospective declaratory relief in her complaint, the Plaintiff lacks standing to proceed in federal court and the Court therefore lacks jurisdiction. See, e.g., 227 NW 13 Ave, Inc. v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., No. 21-21405-Civ, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140785, at *5 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 8, 2022) (Scola, J.) (“Here, the Property Owner is seeking a declaration concerning insurance coverage for a specific past event—an accidental water discharge in October 2020. As there are no allegations of a reasonable expectation of future harm, though, there can be no standing for prospective relief.”).
Accordingly, remand is proper here. For the reasons stated above, the Court grants the joint motion to remand (ECF No. 6) and remands the case to state court. The Court directs the Clerk to close this case and take all necessary steps to ensure the prompt remand of this matter and the transfer of this file back to the Circuit Court for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County. Any pending motions are denied as moot. Done and ordered in Miami, Florida, on September 13, 2022.
Robert N. Scola, Jr. United States District Judge