FI L ED

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S

EL EVENTH CI RCUI T

OCT 5, 2011

J OHN L EY

CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

N o

. 1 1

- 1 0 1 6 7

N o n

- A r g u m e n t C a l e n d a r

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

D

. C

. D o c k e t N o

. 0 : 1 0

- c v

- 6 0 5 6 1

- W P D

H I L D A S U L T A N

, C R A I G S U L T A N

,

P l a i n t i f f s

- A p p e l l a n t s

,

v e r s u s

S A F E C O S U R P L U S L I N E S I N S U R A N C E C O M P A N Y

,

a W a s h i n g t o n c o r p o r a t i o n

,

D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l e e

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A p p e a l f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t

f o r t h e S o u t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f F l o r i d a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

( O c t o b e r 5

, 2 0 1 1 )

B e f o r e T J O F L A T

, H U L L a n d B L A C K

, C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.

P E R C U R I A M :H i l d a S u l t a n a n d C r a i g S u l t a n ( t h e S u l t a n s ) a p p e a l t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s o r d e r

d i s m i s s i n g t h e i r c l a i m s a g a i n s t S a f e c o S u r p l u s L i n e s I n s u r a n c e ( S a f e c o ) f o r

v i o l a t i o n s o f F l o r i d a S t a t u t e § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 )

, w h i c h r e g u l a t e s i n s u r a n c e f i e l d

r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a n d o p e r a t i o n s

. T h e S u l t a n s c o n t e n d t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d b y :

( 1 ) m i s i n t e r p r e t i n g § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c ) a n d c o n c l u d i n g t h e S u l t a n s f a i l e d t o a l l e g e

S a f e c o i m p o s e d a p r o h i b i t e d s e p a r a t e h a n d l i n g c h a r g e ; a n d ( 2 ) c o n c l u d i n g t h e

S u l t a n s f a i l e d t o a l l e g e S a f

e c o u s e d p r o t e c t e d i n s u r a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n t o s o l i c i t t h e

s a l e o f i n s u r a n c e i n v i o l a t i o n o f § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( d )

. A f t e r r e v i e w

, w e a f

f i r m t h e

d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s d i s m i s s a l o f t h e S u l t a n s ’ c l a i m s

.

I

. B A C K G R O U N D

T h e S u l t a n s a r e r e s i d e n t i a l h o m e o w n e r s

, w h o o b t a i n e d a h o m e m o r t g a g e

f r o m a n u n n a m e d l e n d e r

. N o n

- p a r t y E v e r H o m e M o r t g a g e C o m p a n y ( E v e r H o m e )

s e r v i c e d t h e S u l t a n s ’ m o r t g a g e o n b e h a l f o f t h e l e n d e r

.

I n t h e e v e n t t h e S u l t a n s f a i l e d t o m a i n t a i n a d e q u a t e i n s u r a n c e c o v e r a g e o n

t h e i r h o m e

, t h e m o r t g a g e p e r m i t t e d t h e l e n d e r t o p u r c h a s e a “ f o r c e

- p l a c e d ” p o l i c y

t o p r o t e c t i t s i n t e r e s t i n t h e p r o p e r t y

, a n d s u b s e q u e n t l y c h a r g e t h e S u l t a n s f o r t h e

p o l i c y p r e m i u m

. O n D e c e m b e r 4

, 2 0 0 6

, E v e r H o m e

, a c t i n g a s t h e l e n d e r ’ s a g e n t

,

p u r c h a s e d a f

o r c e

- p l a c e d i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y f r o m S a f e c o o n t h e S u l t a n s ’ h o m e

.

2S h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r

, E v e r H o m e b i l l e d t h e S u l t a n s $ 3 3

, 1 9 8

. 5 7

– t h e p u r p o r t e d

p r e m i u m f

o r t h e p o l i c y

.

T h e S u l t a n s a l l e g e E v e r H o m e a n d S a f e c o c o l l u d e d t o o v e r c h a r g e t h e m f o r

t h e f o r c e

- p l a c e d p o l i c y

. A c c o r d i n g t o t h e S u l t a n s

, E v e r H o m e p u r c h a s e d f o r c e

p l a c e d p o l i c i e s e x c l u s i v e l y f r o m S a f e c o a t d r a m a t i c a l l y i n f

l a t e d p r e m i u m s i n

e x c h a n g e f

o r k i c k b a c k s a n d o t h e r r e l a t e d p a y m e n t s

. E v e r H o m e

, t h e S u l t a n s a l l e g e

,

r e t a i n e d t h e k i c k b a c k s w h i l e p a s s i n g t h e c o s t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e i n f l a t e d

p r e m i u m s t o b o r r o w e r s

. T h e S u l t a n s c l a i m t h a t i n t h i s c a s e

, S a f e c o p a i d

E v e r H o m e a s a k i c k b a c k $ 7

, 1 3 7

. 5 7 o f t h e $ 3 3

, 1 9 8

. 5 7 i n s u r a n c e p r e m i u m

.

I I

. D I S C U S S I O N

T h i s c i r c u i t a p p l i e s a d e n o v o s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w w h e n c o n s i d e r i n g a d i s t r i c t

c o u r t ’ s d i s m i s s a l f

o r f a i l u r e t o s t a t e a c l a i m

. L e v i n e v

. W o r l d F i n a n

. N

e t w o r k N a t ’ l

B a n k

, 4 3 7 F

. 3 d 1 1 1 8

, 1 1 2 0 ( 1 1 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 6 ) ( c i t a t i o n o m i t t e d )

.

A

. F a i l u r e t o S t a t e a C l a i m u n d e r F l o r i d a S t a t u t e § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c )

T h e S u l t a n s a l l e g e S a f

e c o r e q u i r e d t h e m t o “ p a y a s e p a r a t e c h a r g e i n

c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e h a n d l i n g o f ” t h e f o r c e

- p l a c e d p o l i c y i n v i o l a t i o n o f F l o r i d a

S t a t u t e § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c )

. T h e S u l t a n s a r g u e t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t m i s i n t e r p r e t e d

§ 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c ) b y f

i n d i n g t h e p r o v i s i o n d i d n o t r e s t r i c t a n i n s u r a n c e b u s i n e s s

3f

r o m i m p o s i n g a s e p a r a t e c h a r g e

, s o l o n g a s t h e i n s u r a n c e b u s i n e s s w o u l d h a v e

i m p o s e d t h a t c h a r g e h a d t h e i n s u r a n c e b u s i n e s s i t s e l f p r o v i d e d t h e p o l i c y

.

T h e r e l e v a n t p a r t o f § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c ) s t a t e s t h a t n o p e r s o n m a y :

R e q u i r e

, d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y

, t h a t a n y b o r r o w e r

, m o r t g a g o r

,

p u r c h a s e r

, i n s u r e r

, b r o k e r

, o r a g e n t p a y a s e p a r a t e c h a r g e i n

c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e h a n d l i n g o f a n y i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y t h a t i s r e q u i r e d

i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h a l o a n o r o t h e r e x t e n s i o n o f c r e d i t o r t h e p r o v i s i o n

o f a n o t h e r t r a d i t i o n a l b a n k i n g p r o d u c t

, o r p a y a s e p a r a t e c h a r g e t o

s u b s t i t u t e t h e i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y o f o n e i n s u r e r f o r t h a t o f a n o t h e r

,

u n l e s s s u c h c h a r g e w o u l d b e r e q u i r e d i f t h e p e r s o n w e r e p r o v i d i n g t h e

i n s u r a n c e

.

B a s e d o n t h e a r g u m e n t s b e f o r e u s

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i d n o t e r r b y

c o n c l u d i n g t h e u n l e s s c l a u s e m o d i f i e s t h e “ s e p a r a t e c h a r g e s i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e

h a n d l i n g o f

” p r o v i s i o n

. D e s p i t e t h e S u l t a n s ’ c l a i m s t o t h e c o n t r a r y

, t h e 1 9 9 9

a m e n d m e n t ’ s l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y s u p p o r t s t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f §

6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c )

. I n a s e c t i o n e n t i t l e d “ E f f e c t o f P r o p o s e d C h a n g e s

, ” t h e F l o r i d a

S e n a t e s t a f

f a n a l y s i s a c c o m p a n y i n g t h e a m e n d m e n t s t a t e s t h e a m e n d m e n t w o u l d

1

“ p r o h i b i t [ ] a n y p e r s o n f r o m r e q u i r i n g a b o r r o w e r

, m o r t g a g o r

, p u r c h a s e r

, i n s u r e r

,

b r o k e r

, o r a g e n t t o p a y a s e p a r a t e c h a r g e i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h a l o a n

, e x t e n s i o n o f

The Florida Senate staff analy sis includes a disclaimer stating it “does not ref lect the intent 1

or officia l position of the bill’s sponsor or t h e Florida Senate.” Florida courts have nonetheless

relied on senate staff analy ses in discussing leg islative intent. See, e.g., Grosso v. State

, 2 So. 3d

362, 365 (F la. 4 DCA 2008) (“A s the Senate Staff Analy sis below indicates, the leg islative intent t h

of section 943.0436 was to enfor ce sexual preda tor and offe n d er re gi s tration require ments

. . .”);

Dep’ t of Envtl. Reg. v. SCM Glidco Organics Corp.

, 606 So. 2d 722, 725 (F la. 1 DCA 1992) (“Staff st

analy ses of leg islation should be accor ded sig nificant re spect in dete rmining le g islative intent.”).

4c r e d i t

, o r a n o t h e r b a n k i n g p r o d u c t

, u n l e s s s u c h c h a r g e w o u l d b e r e q u i r e d i f t h e

p e r s o n w e r e p r o v i d i n g t h e i n s u r a n c e

. ” T h e s t a f f a n a l y s i s t h u s i n d i c a t e s t h e

l e g i s l a t u r e k n o w i n g l y a d d e d t h e u n l e s s c l a u s e t o m o d i f y § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c ) ’ s

r e s t r i c t i o n o n s e p a r a t e c h a r g e s

. 2

I n l i g h t o f t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s f i n d i n g t h a t t h e u n l e s s c l a u s e m o d i f i e s t h e

“ s e p a r a t e c h a r g e i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e h a n d l i n g o f ” p r o v i s i o n

, t o s t a t e a c l a i m

u n d e r § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c )

, t h e S u l t a n s m u s t a l l e g e ( 1 ) S a f e c o r e q u i r e d t h e m t o p a y a

s e p a r a t e c h a r g e i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e h a n d l i n g o f t h e f o r c e

- p l a c e d p o l i c y a n d ( 2 )

t h e u n l e s s c l a u s e d o e s n o t e x e m p t t h e s e p a r a t e c h a r g e f r o m t h e r e s t r i c t i o n

.

S e c t i o n 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c ) ’ s u n l e s s c l a u s e r e m o v e s f r o m t h e r e s t r i c t i o n o n

s e p a r a t e c h a r g e s a n y “ c h a r g e [ t h a t ] w o u l d b e r e q u i r e d i f t h e p e r s o n w e r e p r o v i d i n g

t h e i n s u r a n c e

. ” “ W h e n t h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e s t a t u t e i s c l e a r a n d u n a m b i g u o u s a n d

c o n v e y s a c l e a r a n d d e f i n i t e m e a n i n g

. . . t h e s t a t u t e m u s t b e g i v e n i t s p l a i n a n d

o b v i o u s m e a n i n g

. ” M i l l e r v

. S c o t t s d a l e I n s

. C o

. , 9 3 2 S o

. 2 d 1 0 2 8

, 1 0 3 0 ( F l a

.

2 0 0 6 ) ( c i t a t i o n o m i t t e d )

. C o u r t s a r e “ w i t h o u t p o w e r t o c o n s t r u e a n u n a m b i g u o u s

s t a t u t e i n a w a y w h i c h w o u l d e x t e n d

, m o d i f y

, o r l i m i t

, i t s e x p r e s s t e r m s o r i t s

This circ uit has, at times, analy zed statutory lang uage b y apply ing “the rule of the last 2

antec edent, an acc epted canon of statutory construction which provides that

. . . ‘qualify ing words,

phrase s, and clause s are to be applied to the words or phrase immediately prec eding

, and are not to

be construed as extending to and including ot hers more re m o t e. ’ ” In re Paschen

, 296 F.3d 1203,

1209 (11 Cir. 2002) (quoting United States v. Correa

, 750 F.2d 1475, 1481 n.10 (11 Cir. 1985)).

t h t h

Be cause the Sultans do not arg ue the r ule applies to § 626.9551(1)( c), we do not consider it her e.

5r e a s o n a b l e a n d o b v i o u s i m p l i c a t i o n s

. ” H o l l y v

. A u l d

, 4 5 0 S o

. 2 d 2 1 7

, 2 1 9 ( F l a

.

1 9 8 4 ) ( c i t a t i o n o m i t t e d )

.

I n t h i s c a s e

, t h e S u l t a n s c o n c e d e : ( 1 ) S a f e c o p r o v i d e d t h e i n s u r a n c e ; a n d ( 2 )

S a f e c o r e q u i r e d t h e a l l e g e d s e p a r a t e c h a r g e

. A s a r e s u l t

, r e g a r d l e s s o f w h e t h e r t h e y

a l l e g e d a s e p a r a t e c h a r g e

, t h e S u l t a n s ’ c l a i m f a i l s b e c a u s e t h e y d o n o t

, a n d c a n n o t

,

a l l e g e S a f

e c o w o u l d n o t h a v e i m p o s e d t h e s e p a r a t e c h a r g e h a d i t p r o v i d e d t h e

p o l i c y

. S a f

e c o

, a s t h e i n s u r a n c e p r o v i d e r r e q u i r i n g t h e d i s p u t e d c h a r g e

, f a l l s 3

s q u a r e l y w i t h i n t h e u n l e s s c l a u s e ’ s e x e m p t i o n

. A c c o r d i n g l y

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i d

n o t e r r i n f

i n d i n g t h a t t h e S u l t a n s f a i l e d t o a l l e g e a c l a i m u n d e r § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( c )

.

B

. F a i l u r e t o S t a t e a C l a i m u n d e r F l o r i d a S t a t u t e § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( d )

T h e S u l t a n s a r g u e t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d i n f i n d i n g t h e y f

a i l e d t o a l l e g e

S a f e c o u s e d p r o t e c t e d i n s u r a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n f

o r t h e p u r p o s e o f s o l i c i t i n g t h e s a l e

o f i n s u r a n c e i n v i o l a t i o n o f F l o r i d a S t a t u t e § 6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( d )

. S e c t i o n

6 2 6

. 9 5 5 1 ( 1 ) ( d ) s t a t e s t h a t n o p e r s o n m a y :

u s e o r p r o v i d e t o o t h e r s i n s u r a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n r e q u i r e d t o b e d i s c l o s e d

b y a c u s t o m e r t o a f

i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n

, o r a s u b s i d i a r y o r a f f i l i a t e

t h e r e o f

, i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e e x t e n s i o n o f c r e d i t f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f

The unless clause makes no distinction betwee n char g es imposed in association with a 3

direc t p o l i cy issuance and t hose i mposed in association with a non-direct poli cy issuance. As the

district court corr ectly notes, the unless clause simply remove s from the prohibitio n o n s ep ar ate

char g es those char g es that would have been imposed had the insurance business provided the policy

. Her e, Safec o provided th e p o l i cy and imposed the char g e. The Sultans’ alleg ations that Safec o

would have not have imposed the char g e had Safec o issued the policy direc t l y do not addre ss the

defic iency

in the § 626.9551(1)( c) c laim.

6s o l i c i t i n g t h e s a l e o f i n s u r a n c e

, u n l e s s t h e c u s t o m e r h a s g i v e n e x p r e s s

w r i t t e n c o n s e n t o r h a s b e e n g i v e n t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o o b j e c t t o s u c h u s e

o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n

. I n s u r a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n m e a n s i n f

o r m a t i o n

c o n c e r n i n g p r e m i u m s

, t e r m s

, a n d c o n d i t i o n s o f i n s u r a n c e c o v e r a g e

, i n s u r a n c e c l a i m s

, a n d i n s u r a n c e h i s t o r y p r o v i d e d b y t h e c u s t o m e r

.

T h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o o b

j e c t t o t h e u s e o f i n s u r a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n m u s t b e

i n w r i t i n g a n d m u s t b e c l e a r l y a n d c o n s p i c u o u s l y m a d e

.

T h e S u l t a n s i d e n t i f

y o n l y o n e l e t t e r a s a p o s s i b l e s o l i c i t a t i o n

. T h e

l e t t e r

– d a t e d M a r c h 2 6

, 2 0 0 7

, a n d a d d r e s s e d t o C r a i g S u l t a n

– p r o v i d e s a b a s i c

d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y a n d e x p l a i n s

, “ P l e a s e b e a w a r e t h a t y o u w i l l b e

r e s p o n s i b l e f

o r t h e i n s u r a n c e c h a r g e s f o r t h i s c o v e r a g e

. . . . I f y o u p r o v i d e p r o o f o f

c u r r e n t c o v e r a g e

, t h i s i n s u r a n c e w i l l b e c a n c e l l e d

. . . W e e n c o u r a g e y o u t o o b t a i n

a c c e p t a b l e r e p l a c e m e n t c o v e r a g e

. ”

T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i d n o t e r r i n f i n d i n g t h e S u l t a n s f

a i l e d t o a l l e g e S a f

e c o

u s e d p r o t e c t e d i n s u r a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n t o s o l i c i t t h e s a l e o f i n s u r a n c e f o r t w o

r e a s o n s

. F i r s t

, i t i s u n c l e a r f r o m t h e S u l t a n s ’ a l l e g a t i o n s h o w S a f e c o u s e d

p r o t e c t e d i n s u r a n c e i n f

o r m a t i o n i n t h e M a r c h 2 6 l e t t e r

. T h e l e t t e r i t s e l f c o n t a i n s n o

r e f e r e n c e s t o a n y p r o t e c t e d i n s u r a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n

, a n d t h e S u l t a n s o f f e r o n l y

b r o a d

, c o n c l u s o r y a l l e g a t i o n s i n s u p p o r t o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n

.

S e c o n d

, t h e l e t t e r c a n n o t b e c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s a s o l i c i t a t i o n

. T h e S u l t a n s c i t e

B l a c k ’ s L a w D i c t i o n a r y

, 1 4 2 7 ( 8 e d

. 2 0 0 4 )

, a s d e f i n i n g a s o l i c i t a t i o n a s “ [ a ] n th

a t t e m p t o r e f

f o r t t o g a i n b u s i n e s s

. ” W h i l e c o n c e d i n g t h e l e t t e r d o e s n o t a t t e m p t t o

7p e r s u a d e a p o t e n t i a l b u y e r

– E v e r H o m e h a d p r o c u r e d t h e p o l i c y n e a r l y f o u r m o n t h s

p r i o r t o t h e d a t e o f t h e l e t t e r

– t h e S u l t a n s c l a i m t h e l e t t e r i s a n a t t e m p t o r e f f o r t t o

g a i n b u s i n e s s b y c o e r c i o n

. A l t h o u g h i t i n f o r m s t h e S u l t a n s t h a t t h e y “ w i l l b e

r e s p o n s i b l e f

o r t h e i n s u r a n c e c h a r g e s f o r t h i s c o v e r a g e

, ” t h e l e t t e r d o e s n o t d e m a n d

i m m e d i a t e o r f

u t u r e p a y m e n t a n d e n c o u r a g e s t h e S u l t a n s t o o b t a i n r e p l a c e m e n t

i n s u r a n c e

. N o t h i n g i n t h e l e t t e r a m o u n t s t o a n a t t e m p t t o c o e r c e p a y m e n t

.

A c c o r d i n g l y

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i d n o t e r r i n f i n d i n g t h a t t h e S u l t a n s f a i l e d t o a l l e g e

S a f e c o u s e d p r o t e c t e d i n f

o r m a t i o n t o s o l i c i t t h e s a l e o f i n s u r a n c e

. 4

A F F I R M E D

.

I n their reply brief, the Sultan s arg ue for the first time on appea l that the district court 4

should have adopted the Florida Depa rtment of Financ ial Service s Offic e of I nsuranc e Reg ulation’s

publ i shed i nterpre tation of § 626.9551(1)( d). Reg ardle ss of t he merits of t his arg ument, it is well

established in this circ uit that “[a]rgume nts raised for the first time in a reply brief are not proper ly

befor e a revie wing court.” United States v. Evans

, 473 F.3d 1115, 1120 (11 Cir. 2006 ) (quoting t h

Herring v. Sec’

y, Dep’ t of Corrections

, 397 F.3d 1338, 1342 (11 Cir. 2005)). As a result, we need t h

not consider this issue.

8