10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 889a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Validity — Document assigning proceeds of any settlement or judgment resulting from insured’s exercise of rights to recovery against any proceeds of insurance policy against which insured may make claim for payment and reserving any and all right of suit to procure payment of benefits does not constitute assignment of benefits

CHIROMED CHIROPRACTIC CENTER, (Robert Lamb), Plaintiff(s), v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant(s). Circuit Court, 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County, Civil Action. Case No. 01-22254. Division “H”. August 11, 2003. Paul L. Huey, Judge. Counsel: Roberts Bradford, for Plaintiff. Steven Manno, for Defendant.

AFFIRMED. 12 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 211b

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENTFOR STATE FARM

State Farm’s Motion for Summary Judgment having come on for hearing on June 30, 2003, and the Court having reviewed the file, heard argument of counsel and researched applicable law, FINDS, ORDERS AND ADJUDGES:

1. That the form on which Plaintiff relies for standing provides, in part:

“I irrevocable assign to CHIROMED CHIROPRACTIC, INC., to the extent of any services rendered to me by CHIROMED CHIROPRACTIC, INC., the proceeds of any settlement or judgment resulting from the exercise by myself of any rights of recovery I have against any person or organization legally responsible for the bodily injury for which I have been rendered treatment and/or the proceeds of my insurance policy under which such services are covered and against which I may make a claim for payment.

*****

I expressly reserve any and all right of suit to procure payment of any benefits to which I may be entitled.

Signed 9/22/97 by Robert Lamb. (emphasis added).”

2. That Defendant argues that this language does not constitute an assignment of benefits to the Plaintiff. The Court agrees that Robert Lamb retained all rights to seek benefits from State Farm. See, Bell v. Allstate, [10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 298a] 13th Circuit (Appellate), Case No. 02-6789, Div X, L.C. Case No. 01-3274-SC; Ward v. State Farm, 9 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 365a (Fla. 13th Jud. Cir., March 8, 2001), cert. den. 798 So.2d 739 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Lapensee v. State Farm, [9 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 170b] 13th Cir. Appellate, Case No. 01-1609, County Case No. 97-17380 (Jan. 17, 2002).

3. That the Motion is GRANTED.

* * *