ORDER

ELIZABETH A. KOVACHEVICH, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court pursuant to Defendant's, 21ST CENTURY SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY F/K/A NEW HAMPSHIRE INDEMNITY COMPANY ("21st Century"), Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence or Argument About the Proposed Cunningham-type Agreement, (Doc. # 82), filed May 12, 2014, and Plaintiffs', ROBERT KROPILAK and NICOLE L. COLLINS, Response in Opposition, (Doc. # 95), filed May 27, 2014. For the reasons that follow, 21st Century's motion is granted.

21st Century seeks to the proposed Cunningham-type agreement on the basis that the proposed agreement bears no relevance on the issues, and that any potential relevance is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Plaintiffs oppose this contention, and argue the refusal to accept the Cunningham-type agreement is a form of bad faith the jury should consider.

The Court agrees with Defendants and the various cases Defendants have cited for their proposition that the agreement is excludable. See, e.g., Keifer v. Gov't Employees Insurance Co., 2002 WL 34924509 (11th Cir. 2002); Berges v. Infinity Insurance Co., 896 So.2d 665 (Fla. 2004); Rynd v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 2012 WL 939387 (M.D. Fla. 2012). The Court further notes, as Defendants have rightly pointed out, that Magistrate Judge Wilson previously ruled this type of agreement was not admissible, and in fact granted a protective order against discovery related to this type of agreement, wherein Plaintiffs' counsel conceded he had no legal authority supporting his theory of a Cunningham-type agreement.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant's Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence or Argument About the Proposed Cunningham-type Agreement is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs are precluded from eliciting any evidence concerning a Cunningham-type agreement.

DONE and ORDERED.