Case Search

Please select a category.

OCCUPATIONAL AND REHABILITATION CENTER, as assignee of Carmen Santiago, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 565a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Submission of demand letter is not condition precedent to filing amended complaint to include additional charges for unpaid PIP benefits — Motion to amend complaint granted

OCCUPATIONAL AND REHABILITATION CENTER, as assignee of Carmen Santiago, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 4th Judicial Circuit in and for Duval County, Small Claims Court. Case No. 16-2003-SC-007083, Division J. April 19, 2004. Eleni Elia Derke, Judge. Counsel: David G. Candelaria, Farah, Farah & Abbott, P.A., Jacksonville. Julia Matthiason Pinnell.

ORDER

Granting Motion to Amend Complaint

THIS CAUSE coming before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint, and the Court having heard the argument of both counsel, and having considered relevant Florida law, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Plaintiff filed a lawsuit on July 18, 2003, seeking unpaid No-Fault Benefits, for treatment provided by the Plaintiff to Defendant’s insured, Carmen Santiago, arising from a motor vehicle accident of July 19, 2002.

2. On or about January 23, 2004, after receiving responses to Plaintiff’s discovery, the Plaintiff filed its Motion to Amend Complaint to include additional charges for unpaid No-Fault Benefits for dates of services not mentioned in the original Complaint.

3. Defendant objected to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint and argued that the Plaintiff is required to submit a “demand letter”as required by Florida Statute §627.736(11)(a) (2003), then move to Amend the Complaint after the 15-day demand period elapsed.

4. Based on the unambiguous language of Florida Statute §627.736(11)(a) (2003), Plaintiff is not required to submit a “demand letter” to Defendant, as the condition precedent to the filing an Amended Complaint. An amendment to a complaint does not constitute a separate action for benefits. Once an action for No-Fault Benefits is filed, and conditions precedent are met, it is unnecessary to send further “demand letters”, and possibly, file separate lawsuits, when a plaintiff is simply amending the amount of damages in the complaint.

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

5. Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend the Complaint is GRANTED.

6. Defendant shall file an Answer to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint within twenty (20) of April 14, 2004.

* * *

Skip to content