State Farm then demanded reimbursement of the paid benefits from both the school board and its insurer, Safety National Casualty Corporation. Both the school board and Safety National rejected State Farm's demand, and State Farm sued.

State Farm moved for summary judgment, arguing that because it was undisputed that the school board owned the bus and that Safety National insured the bus, it was entitled to reimbursement as a matter of law pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 627.7405(1).

The school board also moved for summary judgment, arguing that State Farm's claim was barred by sovereign immunity, which it raised as an affirmative defense, and that Florida's no-fault law did not contain an express waiver of sovereign immunity.

The trial court concluded that sovereign immunity was not a bar to State Farm's entitlement to reimbursement from the school board, and the school board appealed. It argued that school boards were government agencies entitled to the benefit of sovereign immunity and that no Florida law clearly and unequivocally waived sovereign immunity in this instance.

Florida Law

Section 627.7405(1) provides:

Notwithstanding ss. 627.730-627.7405, an insurer providing personal injury protection benefits on a private passenger motor vehicle shall have, to the extent of any personal injury protection benefits paid to any person as a benefit arising out of such private passenger motor vehicle insurance, a right of reimbursement against the owner or the insurer of the owner of a commercial motor vehicle, if the benefits paid result from such person having been an occupant of the commercial motor vehicle or having been struck by the commercial motor vehicle while not an occupant of any self-propelled vehicle.

Section 627.732(3)(b) defines “commercial motor vehicle” as:

any motor vehicle which is not a private passenger motor vehicle

but does not include:

a mobile home or any motor vehicle which is used in mass transit, other than public school transportation, . . . and which is owned by a municipality, a transit authority, or a political subdivision of the state.

The Appellate Court's Decision

The appellate court affirmed, reasoning that Florida's no-fault law specifically included public school buses in the definition of “commercial motor vehicle” and thereby subjected owners of public school buses to the reimbursement provision of Section 627.7405(1).

In its decision, the appellate court rejected the school board's contention that Florida law had not waived sovereign immunity for school boards in no-fault cases. The appellate court conceded that Chapter 627 did not include the phrase “the state . . . waives sovereign immunity,” but said that it could “not ignore the fact” that the legislature specifically excluded motor vehicles used for public school transportation from its definition of what was “not a commercial motor vehicle.”

The appellate court reasoned that, by expressly including vehicles used for public school transportation in the definition of “commercial motor vehicle,” while expressly excluding other vehicles “used in mass transit” and “owned by a municipality, a transit authority, or a political subdivision of the state,” the legislature “has clearly and unequivocally waived sovereign immunity” for actions brought under Section 627.7405(1) for reimbursement of PIP benefits paid to individuals injured on vehicles used for public school transportation, which necessarily included public school buses.

The appellate court concluded by rejecting the school board's argument that it should be exempt from reimbursement under Section 627.7405(1) because the legislature expressly exempted motor vehicles used as school buses from the statutory requirement to maintain no-fault insurance coverage, concluding that the express exemption of school buses from the requirement to maintain no-fault insurance did not conflict with the express inclusion of school buses in the definition of a “commercial motor vehicle,” the owner of which was subject to the reimbursement provision of Section 627.7405(1).

The case is Lee County School Board v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., Nos. 2D17-4595, 2D17-4899 (Fla. Ct. App. May 24, 2019). Attorneys involved include: Andrew S. Bolin of Beytin, McLaughlin, McLaughlin, O'Hara, Bocchino & Bolin, Tampa, for Appellant Lee County School Board. Jeremy W. Rogers of Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP, Tampa, for Appellant Safety National Casualty Corporation. David B. Kampf and Sarah M. Sorgie of Ramey & Kampf, P.A. Tampa, for Appellee State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company.