Florida Supreme Court Clarifies Florida Private Whistleblower Act Standard

On May 28, 2026, the Florida Supreme Court issued a significant decision in Gessner v. Southern Company, No. SC2024-1835 (Fla. May 28, 2026), resolving a conflict among Florida's appellate courts regarding the scope of protection available under Florida's Private Whistleblower Act.

The decision provides important guidance for employers defending retaliation claims brought under section 448.102(3), Florida Statutes.

The Dispute

The employee alleged that he was terminated after raising concerns about various workplace safety issues. He filed suit under Florida's Private Whistleblower Act, claiming that he objected to activities he believed violated state or federal law.

The central legal question was whether an employee must prove that the employer's conduct actually violated a law, rule, or regulation, or whether it is enough for the employee to have a good-faith and objectively reasonable belief that a violation occurred.

Florida's district courts had reached different conclusions on that issue, creating uncertainty for employers and employees alike.

The Supreme Court's Holding

The Florida Supreme Court rejected the "good-faith, objectively reasonable belief" standard adopted by some courts. Instead, the Court held that an employee bringing a claim under section 448.102(3) must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the activity, policy, or practice to which the employee objected was actually "in violation of a law, rule, or regulation." A reasonable belief that conduct was unlawful is not enough.

At the same time, the Court clarified that an employee does not have to prove that a government agency or court has already determined that the employer violated the law. Rather, the employee must prove that the challenged activity constituted a violation of law.

Why This Matters for Employers

The decision raises the evidentiary burden for employees pursuing retaliation claims under the Florida Private Whistleblower Act. Before Gessner, employees in some parts of Florida could proceed by showing they reasonably believed an employer's conduct was unlawful. Following the Supreme Court's ruling, employees must now prove that the conduct they opposed was, in fact, unlawful.

This distinction may have a significant impact at both the summary judgment stage and at trial. Employers defending whistleblower claims will likely focus more heavily on whether the underlying conduct actually violated a statute, regulation, or rule.

Practical Takeaways

Employers should not view the decision as eliminating whistleblower risk. Employees who object to genuinely unlawful practices remain protected under Florida law. However, the decision provides employers with a stronger defense when a retaliation claim is based solely on an employee's mistaken belief that conduct was illegal.

Organizations should continue to:

• Investigate employee complaints promptly.

• Document the business reasons supporting disciplinary decisions.

• Train managers on handling employee complaints appropriately.

• Evaluate whether challenged practices comply with applicable laws and regulations.

The Florida Supreme Court's decision provides welcome clarity in an area that had produced inconsistent results across the state and will likely become a frequently cited case in Florida employment litigation.