Cases from cite.case.law:

WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A. v. PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 200 So. 3d 1202 (Fla. 2016)

. . . requiring that an insurable interest exist at the inception of each life insurance policy, and section 627.455 . . . Stat. § 627.455?, 2, Assuming that a party can do so, does Fla. . . . court reasoned that the policy was void ab initio and therefore the incontestability provision of § 627.455 . . . Guild policies were procured in furtherance of STOLI schemes, the incontestability statute, section 627.455 . . . Accordingly, under the plain language of section 627.455, a policy that has the required insurable interest . . . inception of a policy is a precondition for operation of the incontestability provisions of section 627.455 . . .

PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A. v. U. S. N. A., 780 F.3d 1327 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . Stat. § 627.455. . . . The Guild court likened § 627.455 to a statute of limitations that applies regardless of the basis of . . . Stat. § 627.455? 2. Assuming that a party can do so, does Fla. . . . Stat. § 627.455 (1982). . . . . Notably, § 627.455 does not itself impose an incontestability period, but rather mandates that every . . .

A. SCIARETTA, a k a v. LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, v., 899 F. Supp. 2d 1318 (S.D. Fla. 2012)

. . . . § 627.455 (2011). . . .

UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, v. OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION, Of, 985 So. 2d 665 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . concluded the proposed arbitration agreement did not comply with sections 624.155, 627.428(1), and 627.455 . . . United’s proposed arbitration agreement would impair, invalidate, or supersede sections 627.428(1) and 627.455 . . .

ALLSTATE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. MILLER, a. k. a. a. k. a., 424 F.3d 1113 (11th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 627.455, the policy further provided that it would become incontestable after remaining in force . . . Stat. § 627.455. . . . Stat. § 627.455], a reinstatement [of an insurance policy] is incontestable on the ground of fraud after . . . First, Allstate argues that it is not contesting the policy in a manner prohibited by § 627.455 because . . . As discussed above, the Florida appellate courts have uniformly and expressly held that the § 627.455 . . .

GREAT SOUTHERN LIFE INSURANCE CO. v. PORCARO, D., 869 So. 2d 585 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . fraud as it failed to make this challenge during the contestability period provided for in sections 627.455 . . .

ALLSTATE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. C. FOX,, 700 So. 2d 49 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . The decedent’s policy contained an incontestability clause as required by section 627.455, Florida Statutes . . . Section 627.455, Florida Statutes (1995), provides: Incontestability.. — Every insurance contract shall . . .

J. LORING, v. STATE, 674 So. 2d 165 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . to dismiss which was based on an “incontestability clause” in a life insurance contract and sections 627.455 . . .

FIORETTI, v. MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. FIORETTI,, 892 F. Supp. 1492 (S.D. Fla. 1993)

. . . . § 627.455 (1984). We do not think that Bankers Security Life Ins. Society v. . . .

BANKERS SECURITY LIFE INSURANCE SOCIETY, v. S. KANE, f k a S. H. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, v. S. KANE KATZ, H. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, v. S. KANE f k a S. H., 885 F.2d 820 (11th Cir. 1989)

. . . . § 627.455 (1984). . . .

BANKERS SECURITY LIFE INSURANCE SOCIETY, v. S. KANE, f k a S. H. H. f k a H. S. f k a S. H. f k a H. S. f k a S. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, v. S. KANE KATZ, H. H. S. H. S., 689 F. Supp. 1164 (S.D. Fla. 1988)

. . . Section 627.455, and has similarly denied insurers the ability to exclude fraud from these provisions . . .