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
RLI v. Lehman, 2026 WL 2279974 (11th Cir. Aug. 7, 2026) (reversing trial court’s determination that insured could satisfy umbrella policy’s requirement to “maintain” minimum Uninsured Motorist (“UM”) limits of $250K, and to “exhaust” “underlying insurance,” by recovering a total of $250K from two different primary insurers, one of whom initially denied coverage–under Collector Car policy carrying UM limits of $500K—before paying $50K to resolve coverage action; 11th Circuit enforced plain language of umbrella policy that conditioned recovery of UM upon insured’s exhaustion by “payment” of full “limits” of “underlying insurance.”).
Mt. Hawley Ins. Co. v. Legacy Protection & Intelligence Agency, LLC, et al, Case No. 24-22555 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 19, 2026) (exclusions for Abuse, Discrimination, and Pollution each relieve Mt. Hawley of the duty to defend and indemnify its insured security agency from suit alleging that guard punched and pepper-sprayed retail client’s customers while hurling homophobic slur at them).
Compass Bay Townhome Association, Inc. v. United Specialty Ins. Co., et al, 2023-CA-003743-OC (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. February 23, 2026) (Order Granting USIC’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, and denying Association’s MSJ; manuscript amendment to residential townhome exclusion merely removes the exclusion as to the particular townhomes scheduled therein, and does not nullify exclusion as to any other townhomes).
Mercury. v. Candido Hernandez Morales, Case No. 23-CA-001292 DIV C (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. May 8, 2025) (declaratory judgment rescinding auto policy due to application’s false denial of conviction for crime of dishonesty or felony ).
Shapiro v. RLI, Case 6:24-cv-18 (M.D. Orlando April 9, 2025) (April 9, 2025) (dismissing, as moot, declaratory action challenging validity of exhaustion provision in Umbrella UM policy, where identical issue had already been adjudicated in pending UM suit; shutting down attempt to convert valuation dispute into fee-harvesting “coverage dispute.”).
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. 2024-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 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 claims 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, where claimant couldn’t establish that insured was operating a “covered auto” when it provided rough ride home from surgery center).
Mt. Hawley Ins. Co. v. L’Excellence Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 440 F. Supp. 3d 1323 (S.D. Fla. 2020) (no duty to defend or indemnify insured from claim arising directly or indirectly from work by a “contractor” when contract omits risk-shifting provisions required by “Tenants and Contractors Conditions of Coverage.”)
Zarnoch v. RLI, 2019-CA-12095. (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. August 13, 2020) (insured can’t challenge “gap in coverage” between primary and umbrella liability insurance by pursuing declaratory relief against umbrella insurer pre-judgment or settlement above primary insurer’s layer).
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 relieves insurer of duty to defend and indemnify wrongful death suit alleging that, while servicing dead battery, insured failed to detect that battery was leaking sulfuric acid fumes into vehicle’s 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).
Raymond Alfonso v. Sunrise Transportation, Inc., CACE-17-001380 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. August 15, 2019) (Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Join RLI to state court auto-negligence judgment).
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) (summary Judgment for insurer where equipment that caused claimant’s injury was not listed on equipment schedule submitted by insured with application; application is part of the policy despite §627.419’s inapplicability to surplus lines insurers, where application was part of the 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 agreement with rights holder when, absent assignment, plaintiff had no standing to file suit at the outset).
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 to declare that its policy was excess over client’s policy, as applied to Bodily Injury claim against mutual insured arising from discrete accident; court instead declared that fully 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 auto insurer, a scooter salesman’s allegedly Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practice of failing to advise customer/insured of the right to select UM to protect her while operating scooter; salesman had acted as go-between with insurer to facilitate customer’s remote acquisition of insurance to take effect simultaneously with purchase and financing of scooter from dealership).
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 MVA).
Am. Econ. Ins. Co. v. Traylor/Wolfe Architects, Inc., No. 3:12-CV-1094-J-32JBT, 2014 WL 3867676, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 6, 2014) (auto owned by officer of insured corporation doesn’t satisfy Business Auto Policy’s definition of “covered auto” when not “used in the business” at time of MVA).
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 property damage claim due to water intrusion during the 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 can’t avoid “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)(dismissing with prejudice Estate’s spoliation claim against auto insurer who failed to preserve total loss vehicle with collapsed roof, where insurer was not asked to preserve vehicle for potential product defect suit).
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 abuse of process and statutory bad faith claims where liability insurer’s prior suit attempting to recoup, from insured, settlement proceeds paid to third-party claimant, did not result in excess judgment against insured).
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).
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 the 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 prevented 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).
Horace Mann v. Smith, et al, Case No. CL-97-003004 (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct. July 2, 1998) (HO policy exclusions for expected injury and criminal acts bar coverage for lawsuit 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) ...
