fbpx

Florida's Recent News

BAYBRIDGE CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC, P.A., a/a/o JAN MEADE, Plaintiff, vs. USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1016a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1809MEAD

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Amount — Hours reasonably expended — There is no requirement that attorney’s time records itemize time spent on each task within day — Interoffice meetings between attorney and paralegal necessary to coordinate efforts and reduce duplication are compensable — Attorney travel time to appear in person at hearings and depositions of key witnesses is reasonable and is compensable at regular rate — Hours sought by medical provider’s counsel are reasonable in view of insurer’s “go to the mat” defense — Contingency risk multiplier of 2.0 is appropriate where likelihood of success was even or unlikely at outset of case, attorney was unable to mitigate risk of nonpayment, market requires multiplier in PIP cases, attorney recovered more than amount originally sought, and agreement between provider and attorney was pure contingency fee agreement — No merit to argument that necessity of multiplier to obtain competent counsel can only be established by provider’s testimony that he had difficulty obtaining counsel and not by expert testimony of market conditions — Costs, including travel expenses to attend depositions, expert witness fees and prejudgment interest are awarded

Read More »

PEAK PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE CORP., Appellant, vs. MILLENNIUM DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING CENTER a/a/o ENERIO BEATO, Appellee.

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 258a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1803BEAT

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Validity — No error in denying directed verdict on issue of validity of assignment of benefits where insurer did not present evidence that assignment was false or was never executed — Jury properly considered testimony regarding authenticity of assignment

Read More »

NORTH LAUDERDALE CHIROPRACTIC CENTER, INC., as assignee of MARLON McKENZIE, Plaintiff, v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 210a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1802MCKE

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Demand letter — Billing ledgers which were attached to demand letters and which list CPT codes and amounts billed are sufficient to overcome any alleged confusion in body of letters and suffice to put insurer on notice of dates and amounts of services — Assignment submitted with demand letters is sufficient — Moreover, insurer that is not party to assignment or in privity with parties to assignment has no standing to challenge any defects in assignment — Medical provider’s claim that insurer waived defense of defective demand letters by failing to allege defects in responses to demand letters raises issue of fact precluding summary judgment based on defective demand letter issue

Read More »

DARRYL FIELDS, Plaintiff, v. USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 615b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1807FIEL

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Dispute between insured and insurer — Where insured had assigned benefits to two medical providers at time that he filed suit for unpaid PIP benefits, insured did not have standing when suit was filed — Insured’s lack of standing could not be cured by providers’ revocation of assignments after suit was filed

Read More »

CENTRAL PALM BEACH PHYSICIANS & URGENT CARE CENTER (a/a/o Elwira Bartnikowska), Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1168a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1811BART

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Arbitration — Where parties did not request trial de novo within deadline for such request, trial court must enter judgment in accordance with arbitrator’s decision — Five-day mailing period is not applicable to filing of requests for trial de novo where arbitrator served decision by fax — Decision clearly reflects that arbitrator considered parties’ arguments and evidence

Read More »

SHERUNA LATOYA MARTIN, Appellant, v. MGA INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 961a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1810MART

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Application — Misrepresentations — No error in entering summary judgment in favor of insurer that voided policy where it is undisputed that driver seeking PIP benefits is under-21 child of insured, that insured made material misrepresentation on application for policy by failing to list child, and that had insurer known of under-21 child driver it would have charged increased premium or refused to issue policy

Read More »

GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY, Appellant, v. HEALTH USA CORP., a/a/o NATALY BLANCO, and SERGIO GIL, Appellee(s).

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 21b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1801BLAN

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Appeals — Appellate court can and must address issue of its jurisdiction at any time — Order granting medical provider’s motion for partial summary judgment on defense of failure to attend examination under oath, without entry of final summary judgment or ending trial court’s judicial labors in case, is not appealable final order — Circuit court lacks jurisdiction to treat appeal of order as petition for writ of common law certiorari — Even if court had statutorily authorized certiorari review jurisdiction, it does not choose to exercise that discretion in this case where insurer has failed to demonstrate that it lacks adequate remedy by appeal if it suffers adverse final judgment — Certiorari also will not lie to review order denying insurer’s motion for summary judgment on EUO no show issue — Appellate attorney’s fees awarded

Read More »

UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, vs. DORA MAURICIA UBEDA, Appellee.

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 32a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1801UBED

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Appeals — Mandate is recalled where previous opinion relied on now-quashed case — Demand letter — Premature demand letter sent before claim became overdue is deficiency that could be cured by sending second demand letter while suit was pending — Premature demand letter is not deficiency that requires abatement or voluntary dismissal and refiling of action to cure

Read More »

Monthly Archive

2023

2024

2025

Need an attorney?

Latest News

Skip to content