No Magic Words: Sixth District Splits With Third and Fourth on Rejecting Non-Binding Arbitration Awards

Court-ordered non-binding arbitration is supposed to be a low-risk step toward resolution. A losing party who wants a trial simply asks for one. Since 2024, however, the way that request is worded has become a trap. On August 21, 2026, Florida’s Sixth District Court of Appeal held in The Waterfront in Naples Condominium Association, Inc. v. Reynolds Ventures, Inc. that a timely request for trial de novo gave adequate notice that the association rejected the arbitration award, even without the words “notice of rejection” ¹. The court certified conflict with decisions of the Third and Fourth Districts ¹.

The rule change behind the dispute

In June 2024, the Florida Supreme Court retitled Rule 1.820(h) “Notice of Rejection of the Arbitration Decision and Request for Trial” ². Under the amended rule, the arbitration decision counts as rejected only when a party files a “notice of rejection of the arbitration decision and request for trial” no more than 20 days after the arbitrator’s written decision is served ². The rule also states that no action or inaction, other than filing the notice, will be deemed a rejection ¹.

The Fourth District applied that language strictly in People’s Trust Insurance Co. v. Hernandez, holding that a homeowners’ demand for trial de novo was not enough without an express rejection ¹. The Third District followed in Sanchez v. People’s Trust Insurance Co., declining to apply a substantial compliance test ¹.

What happened in Waterfront

The association’s Naples condominium was damaged in Hurricane Ian, and it hired Reynolds Ventures for water and mold remediation ¹. When the association refused to pay the final invoice, Reynolds recorded a construction lien and sued for breach of contract, lien foreclosure and unjust enrichment ¹. The case went to non-binding arbitration, and 20 days after the decision, the association filed a “Motion and Request for Trial De Novo” citing section 44.103(5) and Rule 1.820(h), “as to all claims” ¹.

The parties then kept litigating. Reynolds amended its complaint, and the association filed counterclaims, an exhibit list and a pretrial statement ¹. At a hearing on a different motion, the trial judge raised the amended rule on her own, ruled that the filing had to be called a rejection, unsealed the award and entered judgment on it ¹.

The Sixth District’s reasoning

The Sixth District reversed and remanded for a trial on the merits ¹. Applying textualist principles, the court declined to adopt what it called a “magic-words test” ¹. It noted that the rule requires “a notice,” not a specific form of notice, and that the words “notice of rejection” are not defined, quoted or capitalized in the rule ¹. Using ordinary dictionary meanings, the court concluded that a document requesting trial de novo from a specific award “as to all claims” announced that the association refused to accept the decision ¹.

The court emphasized that it was not reviving substantial compliance based on a party’s conduct; its holding turned on the content of a document timely filed under the rule ¹. It also found that the association complied with section 44.103(5), which makes an award final only if a request for trial de novo is not timely filed ¹.

What practitioners should do now

The law is unsettled. A proposal pending before the Florida Supreme Court in Case No. SC2026-0040 would require only a written request for trial to reject an arbitrator’s decision and would direct that a timely request “be construed so as to do substantial justice” ³. Until the Court acts, the safest course is plain:

• Use the full title. Caption the filing with the rule’s full title, “Notice of Rejection of the Arbitration Decision and Request for Trial,” and state both in the body ².
• Calendar the 20 days from service. The deadline runs from service of the arbitrator’s written decision ².
• Check the district. Outcomes currently differ between the Third, Fourth and Sixth Districts ¹.
• Use the interval wisely. The period after an arbitration decision is often a productive time to mediate, while both sides have a neutral’s view of the merits in hand.

Counsel looking for a Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Civil Mediator for construction, condominium or insurance disputes can check Tony Roca’s live availability and book a mediation by Zoom statewide.