The Broader Insurance Problem
This case highlights a recurring issue in coverage disputes: how insurers stretch exclusions to deny claims.
For policyholders, the “duty to defend” is crucial. In Florida (as in most states), if even one allegation in a lawsuit potentially falls within coverage, the insurer must defend. Courts typically interpret exclusions narrowly, precisely because insurers write them.
Here, IYBA argues Judge D’Angelo flipped that standard by interpreting the clause broadly enough to swallow antitrust claims that don’t obviously stem from standard-setting. For business groups, professionals, and even everyday policyholders, this raises alarms: if insurers can recast ordinary disputes as “exclusion cases,” the safety net people pay premiums for may evaporate.
The Stakes for the Yacht Brokers
If the district judge adopts the magistrate’s recommendation, IYBA will be left to shoulder its own defense costs in a sprawling antitrust class action — a costly burden that could pressure the association into early settlement.
On the other hand, if IYBA prevails, the case could serve as a blueprint for challenging insurers who rely on vague exclusions to dodge coverage. That outcome would resonate well beyond the yacht industry, strengthening the hand of policyholders across sectors.
