12 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 211b
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Validity — No error in construing document that qualifies language of assignment by expressly reserving any and all rights of suit as allowing medical provider only right to file claims directly with insurer, not standing to sue
CHIROMED CHIROPRACTIC CENTER (a/a/o Robert Lamb), Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. Circuit Court, 13th Judicial Circuit (Appellate) in and for Hillsborough County. Case No. 03-8408, Division X. L.C. Case No. 01-22254-CC. August 4, 2004. Vivian Corvo Maye, Judge. Review of a final order of the County Ct., Hillsborough County. Counsel: Robert J. Bradford, Jr., Marks & Fleischer, Ft. Lauderdale, and Kate G. Burnett, Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellant. Michael Morelli, Tampa, for Appellee.
[Lower court order published at 10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 889a.]
Appellant appeals a final summary judgment for Defendant/Appellee on the basis that Appellant lacked standing to bring the suit. The trial court determined that the so-called “assignment” did not confer on the healthcare provider the right to bring suit on the insured’s behalf. The question, being one of law, is one we review de novo. Based upon our review, we affirm the decision of the trial court.
The document in question reads as follows:
I irrevocably assign to CHIROMED CHIROPRACTIC, INC., to the extent of any services rendered to me by CHIROMED CHIROPRACTIC, INC., the proceeds of any settlement or judgement [sic] 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.
* * *
This assignment is made in consideration of CHIROMED CHIROPRACTIC, INC.’s awaiting payment for services rendered. I understand that this in no way relieves me of my primary personal obligation to pay for such services that the signing of this form does not prohibit customary billing by you. I understand that I will be liable for any balance which remains unpaid after application of any payment under this assignment.
I expressly reserve any and all rights of suit to procure payment of any benefits to which I may be entitled.
Appellant’s position is that the insured reserves the right to sue for benefits other than those assigned to Appellant. Appellee’s position is that the insured is the only one who can sue for benefits. In ruling that the assignment did not confer standing because of the insured’s retention of the right to sue, the trial court pointed out that “[the clause reserving any and all rights of suit] couldn’t be more broad” in scope.
Notwithstanding the presence of language of assignment (“I irrevocably assign. . .”), the additional language qualifies the so-called assignment in a meaningful way (“I expressly reserve any and all rights of suit to procure payment of any benefits to which I may be entitled.”). Thus, the document was construed as allowing the healthcare provider only the right to file claims directly with the insurance company. We see no legal reason to disturb the decision of the trial court. It is therefore
ORDERED that the decision of the trial court is AFFIRMED. (Levens and Holder, JJ., concur.)
* * *
