Fay Ryan
Partner | Tampa
fryan@butler.legal
813-281-1900
About | Credentials | Experiences | Media | Print | Share
A Partner at Butler, Fay E. Ryan devotes her Tampa practice to third-party coverage and extra-contractual matters. Within these practice areas, her numerous claims deal with construction defects, auto accidents, slip-and-falls, product liability, defamation, and more. Fay has experience analyzing virtually all types of liability policies, including CGL, Excess and Umbrella, OCIP, Commercial Auto, Personal Lines, E & O, Environmental, and Reinsurance. In addition to providing coverage advice, Fay advises clients on good faith claims handling, including settlement in multi-claimant situations. Fay has tried over fifty jury trials and approximately thirty non-jury trials.
Fay graduated cum laude from Boston College with a Bachelor of Arts degree. She received her Doctor of Jurisprudence, cum laude, from the University of Florida College of Law. During law school, Fay earned the American Jurisprudence Award in Contracts, Estates and Trusts, English Legal History, and Legal Drafting. She is also a member of the Order of the Coif, an honor society for law school graduates who were in the top ten percent of their graduating class.
Since becoming a lawyer, Fay has contributed to the DRI’s multi-state compendium (Florida chapter). She has also been published in Mealey’s Litigation Report: Bad Faith, and DRI’s: For The Defense magazine.
Admissions
- Florida
Education
- Boston College
Bachelor of Arts, Cum Laude - University of Florida
Doctor of Jurisprudence, Order of the Coif
Memberships
- The Florida Bar
Courts
- United States District Court – Middle District of Florida
- United States District Court – Southern District of Florida
- United States District Court – Northern District of Florida
Experiences
For more information regarding these cases, please contact Fay Ryan.
Representative Cases:
Mercury. v. Morales, Case No. 23-CA-001292 DIV C (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. May 8, 2025) (declaratory judgment rescinding auto policy due to applicant’s incorrect denial of conviction of crime of dishonesty or felony ).
Tokio Marine Specialty Insurance Company v. Clear Blue Specialty Insurance Company, Case No. 0:24-cv-62057 (S.D. Fla. March 20, 2025) (dismissal of additional insured coverage claim with prejudice where purported additional insured was not sued for alleged vicarious lability for Named Insured’s negligence).
Mercury v. T&M Lawn-Fence Service, Inc., Case No. 202s4-CA-959-P (Fla. 16th Cir. Ct. February 24, 2025)(passenger’s suit against driver and the insured business seeking damages for on-the-job injury was excluded by one or more of the following exclusions: Work Comp, Employers Liability-Employee Indemnification, Fellow Employee, Renting or Leasing a Covered Auto, and/or Trailer not listed on Policy).
Clear Blue Ins. Co. v. Gemini Ins. Co., 2024 WL 1346941, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 29, 2024) (in connection with claim of construction worker injured by sudden drop of on-site lift, General Contractor’s direct CGL policy was excess over its scaffolding subcontractor’s true Excess Policy covering the GC as an Additional insured).
Esurance Property & Casualty, a/s/o Ceila Ausek, v. Zlatkiss, RLI, et al, 2020-CA- 2844-O (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. January 22, 2024) (dismissal with prejudice of purported “lien impairment” claim brought by third-party claimant’s UM insurer against allegedly at fault motorist’s BI insurer (RLI), asserting that, by securing a release of claimant’s BI claim against its insured, RLI wrongfully impaired UM carrier’s lien).
Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp. v. Kaufman Lynn Constr., Inc., 658 F. Supp. 3d 1239, 1250 (S.D. Fla. 2023) (“Course of Construction” exclusion bars coverage for damage to completed building when project as a whole was not yet complete), aff’d, 130 F.4th 903 (11th Cir. 2025).
RLI Ins. Co. v. Florida Beauty Express, Inc., 2022 WL 19264235, at *5 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 1, 2022) (dismissal of common law “bad faith” counterclaim; insured’s deductible and retrospective premium obligations triggered by insurer’s settlement of third-party claims within policy limits was not “functional equivalent” of “excess judgment” necessary to sue for “bad faith.”).
Security National v. Hiltbrunner, Case No. 20-004971-CI (Fla. 6th Cir. August 19, 2022) (“carrying property for a fee” exclusion bars coverage under personal auto policy for accident that occurred while insured driver was returning from delivery of part to Auto Plus’ customer).
RLI Ins. Co. v. Alfonso, 2021 WL 430720 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 8, 2021) (summary judgment that insurer doesn’t owe coverage for $1.4M judgment against medical transport company due to claimant’s inability to prove that vehicle used to provide allegedly rough ride home from surgery center was scheduled on policy)
Mt. Hawley Ins. Co. v. L’Excellence Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 440 F. Supp. 3d 1323, 1331 (S.D. Fla. 2020) (no duty to defend or indemnify where insured failed to comply with at least three conditions of “Tenants and Contractors Conditions of Coverage”).
Zarnoch v. RLI, 2019-CA-12095. (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. August 13, 2020) (lack of judgment or settlement in excess insurer’s layer prevents insured from challenging excess insurer’s stated attachment point, notwithstanding resulting “gap” between insured’s primary and excess BI coverage; insured’s declaratory action dismissed as premature).
FCCI v. Lock Busters, Inc. D/B/A Pop-A-Lock, 2018-CA-006727-O (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. February 6, 2020) (Total Pollution Exclusion to CGL policy bars coverage for wrongful death claims alleging that vehicle occupants expired from inhalation of hydrogen sulfide that seeped from battery into occupant space.)
Kachele v. RLI, 2019-CA-000282 (Fla. 19th Cir. Ct. January 9, 2020) (dismissal of Uninsured Motorist claim with prejudice due to failure to maintain required minimum UM limits), aff’d, 318 So. 3d 568 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
Endurance Am. Specialty Ins. Co. v. United Constr. Eng’g, Inc., 343 F. Supp. 3d 1274, 1282 (S.D. Fla. 2018) (“statutory employee” status of injured construction worker satisfies term “employee” as used in Employers Liability exclusion, notwithstanding worker’s purported actual status as “temporary worker” or “independent contractor,” both of which are excluded from the policy definition of “employee;” coverage barred by Exclusions d and e (Workers Compensation and Employers Liability)); aff’d, 786 Fed. Appx. 195 (11th Cir. 2019).
Steadfast Ins. Co. v. Celebration Source, Inc., 240 F. Supp. 3d 1295, 1303 (S.D. Fla. 2017) (no coverage for serious injuries to child who slipped from carnival ride that was not listed on equipment schedule submitted by insured with application; insurer’s position that application is part of policy doesn’t depend upon the applicability of Section 627.419 (which is inapplicable to surplus lines insurers), where application is part of policy at common law), aff’d, 730 Fed. Appx. 865 (11th Cir. 2018).
MSPA Claims 1, LLC v. First Acceptance Ins. Co., 2016 WL 4523850, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 29, 2016) (motion to dismiss for lack of standing granted; missing or defective assignment can’t be remedied by post-suit by agreement with rights holder when, absent assignment, plaintiff had no standing to file suit as a threshold matter).
Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London Subscribing to Policy No. SA 10092-11581 v. Waveblast Watersports, Inc., 80 F. Supp. 3d 1311, 1324 (S.D. Fla. 2015) (denial of plaintiff insurer’s request for declaration that its policy was excess over defendant insurer’s policy, as applied to BI claim against mutual insured; concurrent co-primary insurers with effectively identical “Other Insurance” provisions owe pro rata duty to defend).
Myers v. Foremost Ins. Co., 2015 WL 12830477, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 23, 2015) (dismissal with prejudice of insured’s FDUTPA claim attempting to impute, to her auto insurer, a scooter salesman’s allegedly deceptive and unfair trade practice of failing to advise customer/insured of the right to select UM while facilitating her remote purchase of insurance that would protect dealership’s interest in financed vehicle).
Security National Insurance Company v. William West, Matthew West, 2013-CA-013629 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. October 14, 2014) (vicarious liability theory against vehicle owner doesn’t defeat Named Driver Exclusion that expressly bars coverage for “any person” when an “excluded driver” operates the vehicle involved in the accident).
American Economy Ins. Co. v. Traylor/Wolfe Architects, Inc., 2014 WL 3867676, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 6, 2014) (auto owned by officer of insured business doesn’t satisfy Business Auto Policy’s definition of “covered auto” when not “used in the business” at time of accident).
Preferred Contractors Insurance Company v. A & M Fox Roofing, Inc., et al, Case No.s: 10-32743, 10-45782, and 11-11706 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. June 17, 2014) (“ongoing operations” exclusion relieves insurer of duty to defend insured roofer from claim alleging damage from overnight water intrusion occurring before completion of roofing job).
Infinity Auto Ins. Co. v. Ortiz-Garcia, 2011 WL 69082 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 10, 2011) (auto policy successfully rescinded where NY insured falsely claimed in application that he was Florida resident).
Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. Clean Seas Co., Inc., 2009 WL 812072, at *6 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 27, 2009) (retailer’s claim against insured manufacturer seeking reimbursement of damages caused by the sale of defective boat paint to hundreds of customers doesn’t circumvent the “per claim” deductible by aggregating many separate, but similar, claims into single “superclaim;” also, economic losses due to insured’s product failure are not “property damage” under CGL policy’s Insuring Agreement).
Ledezma v. Direct General, et al, 2007 CA 001631 OC (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct., Osceola County, January 9, 2008) (lack of timely request that auto insurer preserve total loss vehicle whose roof collapsed was fatal to Estate’s spoliation claim, which court dismissed with prejudice).
Coachmen Indus., Inc. v. Royal Surplus Lines Ins. Co., No. 3:06-CV-959-J-HTS, 2007 WL 1837842, at *19 (M.D. Fla. June 26, 2007) (dismissing with prejudice insured’s abuse of process claim due to res judicata and statutory bad faith claim based on statute of limitations).
Aubuchon Homes v. Royal & Sunalliance, Case No. 4-CA-003799 (Fla. 20th Cir. Ct. July 31, 2006) (summary judgment for insurer due to “known loss” where home began settling, and foundation cracking, pre-inception of policy).
Rina Madrid v. Traffic Control Products of Florida, Inc., Case No.s 2004-CA-004745 & 2004-CA-6409 (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. March 31, 2006) (summary judgment in fatality and serious BI claim due to no evidence of defendant’s responsibility for Traffic Control Plan or placement of traffic control devices).
Gorthy v. General Manufactured Housing, Case No. 01-CA-004660 (Fla. 13th Circ. Ct. Aug. 15, 2005) (jury verdict for manufacturer of mobile home who was sued by purchasers/residents claiming that alleged defects with construction and installation caused water intrusion, mold growth, and respiratory injuries.)
Scottsdale v. B&J Market, Case No. 2002-CA-003621 (Fla. 10th. Cir. Ct. Sept. 22, 2003) (expected injury exclusion bars coverage where gas station owner shot armed robber in back as he fled the scene).
GuideOne v. Hubbell, Case No: Case 8:02-cv-01143-JDW (M.D. Fla. December 12, 2003) (anti-subrogation rule prevents church’s property insurer from subrogating against reverend who caused fire damage to parsonage, where reverend qualified as “insured” under liability portion of church’s package policy that provided both property and liability coverage).
Tide v. State, 804 So. 2d 412, 413 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (“Order to Show Cause” under Rule 3.840 does not shift burden to the accused to prove he did not violate court order; instead, indirect criminal contempt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt; conviction reversed where judge impermissibly shifted burden of proof to alleged contemnor).
Martin v. Allstate, Case No. CACE97015699 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. July 21, 1999) (jury verdict for insurer Uninsured Motorist case).
Horace Mann v. Smith, Lewis and Kuhn, Case No. CL-97-003004 (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. July 2, 1998) (HO policy exclusions for expected injury and criminal acts bar coverage for claims alleging that white homeowners detained, restrained, and threatened to lynch black youths whom they discovered inside fenced patio of their townhome).
Media
Partner Fay Ryan Published in CLM Article
Congratulations to Tampa Partner Fay Ryan whose article "Claimants Can't Have Their Cake and Eat It Too" was recently published in the CLM Magazine. Discover how the Eleventh Circuit's recent ruling in Compulife v. Zurich reshapes the use of judicial estoppel in insurance recovery for intentional tort claims. Read the full article on the CLM website by clicking here....
Butler Attorneys at the 2024 FDLA FINS
Come meet some of our esteemed attorneys at the FDLA Florida Insurance Network Symposium (FINS) on August 15-16, 2024 at the Renaissance Tampa International Plaza Hotel. This conference will focus on coverage, bad faith, and property insurance featuring high-level presentations by leading insurance attorneys and experts. Click here to visit their website....
Claimants Can’t Have Their Cake and Eat it Too
Eleventh Circuit Judicially Estops Claimant From Recovering Intentional Tort Judgment Under Errors and Omission Liability Policy In a rarely seen application of the judicial estoppel doctrine in the third-party coverage context, on August 1, 2024, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals estopped the holder of an intentional tort judgment from garnishing the proceeds of the judgment debtor’s liabi...
558 – Kiss, Marry, Or Kill?
Partner Fay Ryan and co-presenters Thomas A. Koval (FCCI Insurance Company), Richard Meyerson (S-E-A, Ltd.), Michael E. Milne (Milne Law Group) and Jorge Santeiro (FCCI Insurance Group) presented "558 - Kiss, Marry, or Kill?" for the first annual Florida Insurance Network Symposium (FINS) in Tampa, FL on August 16, 2019. This panel discussed the efficacy of the pre-suit "Notice and Opportunity ...
International Women’s Day
"LEADERSHIP IS ABOUT MAKING OTHERS BETTER AS A RESULT OF YOUR PRESENCE AND MAKING SURE THAT IMPACT LASTS IN YOUR ABSENCE." -SHERYL SANBERG (COO OF FACEBOOK) ...
