When may a Florida party first serve a settlement proposal on a defendant?

Identify the defendant who will receive the proposal and preserve actual process service on that defendant.

Read the actual trial setting and first day of the docket on which this case is set.

Compare both timing limits and establish the proposal’s required content and applicable law.

1. Identify the defendant who will receive the proposal and preserve actual process service on that defendant.
2. Rule 1.090(a) incorporates Rule 2.514(a). Exclude the established event. For seven days or longer, begin with the next day that is not Saturday, Sunday or a legal holiday. Count intermediate calendar days. For fewer than seven days, omit intermediate Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays. Do not treat a seven-day period as seven business days.
3. Check the observed statutory holidays, actual clerk calendar and chief-justice directions.
4. Complete the required act with the proper court or recipient.

Apply the observed New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. birthday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans’ Day, Thanksgiving Day, Friday after Thanksgiving and Christmas Day holidays. Section 110.117 observes Saturday holidays on the preceding Friday and Sunday holidays on the following Monday. Rule 2.514 also includes clerk-observed holidays and days designated by the chief justice or chief judge. An ineligible final day moves in the counting direction. The bundled Florida calendar covers 2026 through 2028. Verify additional closures and chief-justice extensions separately.

An isolated ninety-day threshold cannot establish a permissible proposal-service window. The recipient-specific process event, earlier trial or docket date, complete proposal and applicable Florida law must also be established.

Both limits must permit the actual service date

Rule 1.442(b) permits a proposal to a defendant no earlier than ninety days after process service on that defendant. A proposal to a plaintiff uses ninety days after commencement. Neither may be served later than forty-five days before the earlier trial date or first docket day. An isolated earliest or latest threshold does not establish a valid service window.

Another defendant’s service does not supply this event

Rule 1.442(b) uses service of process on that defendant. Preserve the actual recipient and its own service record. Filing the complaint, serving another party or later ordinary document service cannot be substituted.

A date does not establish a valid proposal

Rule 1.442(c) requires a written proposal identifying the applicable Florida law, each party, the total amount, the prescribed damages scope, punitive amount, fee treatment and service certificate. Nonmonetary terms are excluded except dismissal of all claims with prejudice and other terms permitted by statute. Joint proposals ordinarily allocate each party’s amount and terms. The stated solely vicarious or derivative liability exception requires its actual facts. Section 768.79(6) separately permits a property insurer in a breach-of-contract action to make a joint offer conditioned on mutual acceptance by all joint offerees. Establish that specific statutory branch instead of assuming every joint proposal permits such a condition.

Withdrawal and written acceptance have their own acts

Rule 1.442(e) permits written withdrawal delivered before written acceptance is delivered. A withdrawn proposal is void. Paragraph (f)(1) requires delivery of written acceptance; oral communications do not constitute acceptance, rejection or a counteroffer under the rule. Preserve the actual documents, recipients and delivery evidence.

Rejection does not establish fee entitlement

Rule 1.442(g) requires a sanctions motion served under Rule 1.525. Paragraph (h) addresses applicable-law entitlement, good faith and reasonableness. The amount, judgment comparison, applicable statute and actual court decision require separate review. Mediation has no effect on proposal service or acceptance dates under paragraph (j).

• This page does not establish an enforceable settlement, proper allocation, fee entitlement, class approval or an actual permissible proposal-service window.
• Check the applicable Florida law, actual proposal, recipients, delivery, court dates and any withdrawal.

• Identify the defendant who will receive the proposal and preserve actual process service on that defendant.
• Read the actual trial setting and first day of the docket on which this case is set.
• Compare both timing limits and establish the proposal’s required content and applicable law.
• Rule 1.442(b) permits a proposal to a defendant no earlier than ninety days after process service on that defendant. A proposal to a plaintiff uses ninety days after commencement. Neither may be served later than forty-five days before the earlier trial date or first docket day. An isolated earliest or latest threshold does not establish a valid service window.
• Rule 1.442(b) uses service of process on that defendant. Preserve the actual recipient and its own service record. Filing the complaint, serving another party or later ordinary document service cannot be substituted.
• Rule 1.442(c) requires a written proposal identifying the applicable Florida law, each party, the total amount, the prescribed damages scope, punitive amount, fee treatment and service certificate. Nonmonetary terms are excluded except dismissal of all claims with prejudice and other terms permitted by statute. Joint proposals ordinarily allocate each party’s amount and terms. The stated solely vicarious or derivative liability exception requires its actual facts. Section 768.79(6) separately permits a property insurer in a breach-of-contract action to make a joint offer conditioned on mutual acceptance by all joint offerees. Establish that specific statutory branch instead of assuming every joint proposal permits such a condition.
• Rule 1.442(e) permits written withdrawal delivered before written acceptance is delivered. A withdrawn proposal is void. Paragraph (f)(1) requires delivery of written acceptance; oral communications do not constitute acceptance, rejection or a counteroffer under the rule. Preserve the actual documents, recipients and delivery evidence.
• Rule 1.442(g) requires a sanctions motion served under Rule 1.525. Paragraph (h) addresses applicable-law entitlement, good faith and reasonableness. The amount, judgment comparison, applicable statute and actual court decision require separate review. Mediation has no effect on proposal service or acceptance dates under paragraph (j).
• Rule 1.442(d) requires service on the parties to whom the proposal is made and prohibits court filing unless necessary to enforce the rule. Rule 2.516 controls the prescribed service method and certificate. Preserve the actual proposal, each recipient and timely service evidence. Sending a draft to counsel, filing alone or participating in mediation does not establish valid proposal service.