Florida House Bill 837 Explained: What Miami Injury Victims Need to Know in 2026

Florida House Bill 837, signed by Governor Ron DeSantis on March 24, 2023, is the most consequential civil-justice statute Florida has enacted in a generation. Nearly three years in, it still controls the outcome of almost every personal-injury, wrongful-death, and first-party insurance case filed in Miami-Dade. This 2026 guide, written by The Farber Law Firm in Coral Gables, explains what HB 837 actually did, what the appellate courts have clarified since, and how each change affects a Miami injury or insurance claim today. Every case is different and nothing in this article is legal advice or a promise of any outcome.

Quick Answer: What HB 837 Changed

• Cut the general negligence statute of limitations from four years to two years under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(4)(a).
• Replaced Florida's pure comparative negligence rule with modified comparative negligence — a 50% bar — under Fla. Stat. § 768.81(6).
• Repealed the one-way attorney's fee statute for insurance cases (former Fla. Stat. §§ 627.428 and 626.9373).
• Eliminated the statutory bad-faith presumption that mere negligence proved bad faith and codified a new bad-faith framework under Fla. Stat. § 624.155.
• Restricted evidence of past medical expenses under Fla. Stat. § 768.0427 to amounts actually paid, not billed.
• Presumed transient-lodging owners are not liable for third-party criminal acts if they meet the security requirements of Fla. Stat. § 768.0706.
• Applies to causes of action accruing on or after March 24, 2023. Older claims are still governed by prior law.

Change 1: The Two-Year Statute of Limitations

Before HB 837, a Florida negligence victim had four years to sue under the old § 95.11(3)(a). HB 837 amended § 95.11 and moved general negligence — including car crashes, slip and falls, dog bites, premises liability, negligent security, and construction accidents — to a two-year deadline under § 95.11(4)(a). Wrongful-death claims remain on a two-year clock under § 95.11(4)(e). The change applies to causes of action accruing on or after March 24, 2023. A Miami car crash on March 25, 2023 must be filed by March 25, 2025. Governmental-entity claims still require a written pre-suit notice under Fla. Stat. § 768.28(6) before any suit can be filed, and medical-negligence claims retain their own two-year limitations period and pre-suit process under Chapter 766. Missing any of these deadlines is a hard, jurisdictional bar. Waiting for the insurance company to make a serious offer is the most common way Miami injury victims lose their case.

Change 2: Modified Comparative Negligence (the 50% Bar)

For decades Florida followed pure comparative negligence: a jury could find the plaintiff 90% at fault and the plaintiff still recovered 10%. HB 837 amended Fla. Stat. § 768.81(6) to a modified comparative negligence rule. If the injured person is found more than 50% at fault, recovery is zero. At exactly 50% or below, damages are reduced by the plaintiff's percentage. The rule does not apply to medical-negligence actions. In practice, this makes every disputed-liability case — left-turn crashes, lane-change crashes, pedestrian and bicycle cases, slip-and-fall claims with argument about open-and-obvious conditions — dramatically higher-stakes. It also raises the importance of preserved evidence: dashcam footage, event-data-recorder downloads, surveillance video, and independent eyewitness testimony are often the difference between 40% comparative fault and 55%.

Change 3: Repeal of the One-Way Attorney's Fee Statute for Insurance Cases

For more than a century, Florida required insurance carriers that wrongfully denied or underpaid a claim to pay the policyholder's attorney's fees under Fla. Stat. §§ 627.428 and 626.9373. HB 837 repealed both. SB 2-A (December 2022) had already eliminated assignment of benefits in residential and commercial property insurance going forward. After HB 837, one-way statutory fees are gone from first-party property, disability, life, homeowners, and — because PIP's fee-shifting mechanism under § 627.736(8) ran through § 627.428 — motor-vehicle PIP disputes as well. HB 837 did create a narrow declaratory-judgment fee provision under new Fla. Stat. § 86.121 for total-coverage denials on certain policies. Otherwise, fees can still be recovered through a valid Proposal for Settlement under Fla. Stat. § 768.79, through a properly developed Civil Remedy Notice bad-faith case under § 624.155, or where a specific policy provision or another statute independently provides for them. The strategic result is that first-party insurance cases now turn heavily on the demand-and-Proposal-for-Settlement sequence.

Change 4: A New Bad-Faith Framework

HB 837 rewrote parts of Fla. Stat. § 624.155. Key points for 2026:

• Negligence alone is no longer sufficient to prove bad faith. The claimant must show the insurer failed to act in good faith when handling the claim.
• A claimant, the claimant's representative, and the claimant's attorney all owe a duty to act in good faith in furnishing information, making demands, setting deadlines, and attempting to settle. A jury may consider the claimant's conduct when apportioning damages.
• If the insurer tenders the lesser of policy limits or the amount demanded within 90 days of receiving actual notice of a claim supported by evidence sufficient to support the amount, no bad-faith action lies for that claim.
• The 90-day tender window tolls the statute of limitations on the bad-faith claim.
• Comparative bad faith applies: a jury may reduce a bad-faith recovery based on the claimant's, representative's, or attorney's own conduct.

The practical effect in Miami-Dade is that a well-documented, deadline-driven demand package — police report, medical records, wage-loss documentation, bills, and often an accident-reconstruction or life-care plan — is the single most important document in any excess-exposure UM or third-party liability case.

Change 5: Medical Damages — Billed vs. Paid

Fla. Stat. § 768.0427, created by HB 837, is one of the most litigated provisions of the reform. It restricts the evidence a plaintiff can put before the jury on past medical expenses:

• Past medical expenses billed but not paid are inadmissible.
• If the plaintiff has health insurance (excluding Medicare and Medicaid), evidence of past medical expenses is limited to the amounts actually paid, plus any amounts the plaintiff is obligated to pay a healthcare provider or insurer.
• If the plaintiff was covered by Medicare or Medicaid, evidence is limited to the Medicare/Medicaid-reimbursed amount plus 120% of that amount for the plaintiff's share.
• For uninsured plaintiffs or those treated under a Letter of Protection (LOP), the statute requires disclosure of the LOP and imposes evidentiary limits on the amounts that can be presented to the jury based on the usual and customary reimbursement rates.
• Future medical damages are limited to evidence of the amount that the plaintiff will actually pay, with categorized rules based on whether the plaintiff is insured, uninsured, or a Medicare/Medicaid beneficiary.

Florida appellate courts have continued to work out the boundaries of § 768.0427 through 2025, particularly on LOP disclosure requirements and the admissibility of expert testimony on usual and customary rates. Any Miami injury case that relies on LOP treatment needs a treating-physician and billing-expert strategy tailored to the statute.

Change 6: Negligent-Security Presumption for Transient Lodging

Fla. Stat. § 768.0706, created by HB 837, gives owners and principal operators of a multifamily residential property a presumption against liability for third-party criminal acts committed on the premises if the owner substantially implements a specified list of security measures — including a security assessment, well-lit common areas, security cameras at entrances and exits, a peephole or door-viewer on each unit door, deadbolt locks, and locking devices on windows and sliding doors. The statute is aimed squarely at apartment complexes and short-term rentals, both of which are common negligent-security defendants in Miami-Dade. The presumption is rebuttable but shifts the burden of persuasion. It does not eliminate liability for hotels, bars, nightclubs, retail stores, or parking garages, which continue to be evaluated under general premises-liability principles and the totality-of-the-circumstances test for foreseeability of criminal acts.

What HB 837 Did Not Change

• Florida PIP under Fla. Stat. § 627.736 remains in force, including the 14-day treatment rule and the $10,000 benefit cap. Florida is still a no-fault state for auto medical benefits.
• The permanent-injury threshold under Fla. Stat. § 627.737 for non-economic damages in auto cases remains.
• Wrongful-death causes of action, damages categories, and standing rules under Fla. Stat. §§ 768.16–768.26 are unchanged.
• The uninsured motorist statute, Fla. Stat. § 627.727, and stacking rules were not touched.
• Punitive damages procedures and caps under Fla. Stat. §§ 768.72–768.73 remain in place, subject to the standard exceptions for intentional misconduct and impairment by alcohol or drugs.
• Medical-malpractice pre-suit requirements under Chapter 766 and the two-year/four-year limitation and repose framework are unchanged.
• Workers' compensation exclusive-remedy rules under Fla. Stat. § 440.11 are unchanged.

Retroactivity: What Applies to Older Cases

HB 837 is generally forward-looking. The statute-of-limitations change under § 95.11(4)(a) applies only to causes of action accruing on or after March 24, 2023 — an incident on March 23, 2023, is still governed by the old four-year period. Florida trial and appellate courts have addressed which provisions apply retroactively and which do not, and the litigation on retroactivity continued through 2025. In particular, § 768.0427 (medical-damages evidence) and the modified comparative negligence rule under § 768.81(6) have both been the subject of appellate decisions on their application to pre-effective-date cases. The safest assumption for any 2026 Miami case is: if the incident is on or after March 24, 2023, HB 837 controls; if it is before, prior law generally controls, but every specific issue should be analyzed on its own record.

What HB 837 Means Practically for Miami-Dade Claims

• File suit sooner. The two-year deadline is not a soft target — it is a hard bar. In a serious case, a lawsuit is often filed inside the first year to preserve discovery.
• Preserve evidence early. Modified comparative negligence rewards the side with better proof. Video, EDR downloads, and independent witnesses must be captured in the first weeks.
• Build the demand package for the 90-day tender window. Bad-faith exposure is the leverage that resolves excess-limits UM and third-party cases.
• Track medical damages under § 768.0427 from intake. What the jury will see is not what the provider billed.
• In insurance disputes, plan the Proposal for Settlement under Fla. Stat. § 768.79 into the case from the outset — it is the primary vehicle for fee recovery after the repeal of § 627.428.
• On premises and negligent-security cases against apartments and short-term rentals, discovery must address § 768.0706 compliance from the first requests to produce.

Frequently Asked Questions

When did HB 837 take effect?

It was signed into law on March 24, 2023, and most of its substantive provisions apply to causes of action accruing on or after that date. Certain procedural provisions applied to actions filed after the effective date.

How long do I have to file a personal injury lawsuit in Florida in 2026?

For most negligence claims accruing on or after March 24, 2023, the statute of limitations is two years under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(4)(a). Wrongful death is two years under § 95.11(4)(e). Medical negligence and claims against governmental entities have separate rules. Never rely on general information — confirm the deadline for your specific facts with a Florida attorney.

Can I still recover if I was partly at fault for the accident?

Yes, if your share of fault is 50% or less. Under Fla. Stat. § 768.81(6) as amended by HB 837, more than 50% fault on the injured person bars all recovery. Medical-negligence actions are excluded from this rule.

Does HB 837 apply if my accident happened before March 24, 2023?

Generally no for the statute-of-limitations change and the comparative-negligence change, which are tied to the accrual date. Application of other provisions to pre-effective-date cases has been litigated in Florida appellate courts through 2025 and depends on the specific provision and procedural posture.

Can I still recover my attorney's fees from my insurance company?

The one-way fee statutes (§§ 627.428 and 626.9373) were repealed, which also eliminated PIP fee-shifting under § 627.736(8) that operated through § 627.428. Fees can still be recovered through a valid Proposal for Settlement under Fla. Stat. § 768.79, a properly developed bad-faith action under § 624.155, the narrow declaratory-judgment fee provision in new Fla. Stat. § 86.121, or where a specific policy provision or another statute independently provides for them.

How much does it cost to hire The Farber Law Firm?

Initial consultations are free and confidential. Personal-injury, wrongful-death, and first-party insurance disputes are typically handled on a contingency-fee basis under a written retainer — no attorney's fee unless we make a recovery. All fees and costs are explained in writing before any engagement begins.

Sources

• Florida House Bill 837 (2023), signed March 24, 2023 (https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/837).
• Fla. Stat. § 95.11 (2023) — Limitations other than for the recovery of real property (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0095/Sections/0095.11.html).
• Fla. Stat. § 768.81 (2023) — Comparative fault (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0768/Sections/0768.81.html).
• Fla. Stat. § 768.0427 (2023) — Admissibility of evidence to prove medical expenses (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0768/Sections/0768.0427.html).
• Fla. Stat. § 768.0706 (2023) — Multifamily residential property; presumption against liability (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0768/Sections/0768.0706.html).
• Fla. Stat. § 624.155 (2023) — Civil remedy (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0600-0699/0624/Sections/0624.155.html).

Talk to a Miami Attorney About How HB 837 Affects Your Case

If you were injured in Miami-Dade on or after March 24, 2023, or you are fighting a Florida insurance denial, HB 837 controls the deadlines, the evidence, and the leverage in your case. The Farber Law Firm has represented South Florida injury victims and policyholders since 1995 from our Coral Gables office at 2937 SW 27th Avenue, Suite 101. Call 305-774-0134 or request a free case review for a confidential conversation about your options under Florida's 2026 tort-reform framework.