12 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1091a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Where insured made unqualified irrevocable assignment of “any and all causes of action” under policy to medical provider, insured’s subsequent medical provider who also accepted assignment of benefits has no right to make claim on policy and has no cause of action against insurer — Question certified
ROSE RADIOLOGY CENTERS, INC. a/a/o David Hill, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE AUTO PRO INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County. Case No. 04-25331, Division I. August 18, 2005. Charlotte W. Anderson, Judge. Counsel: Arthur Liebling, Safety Harbor, for Plaintiff. Randall A. Wainoris, Haas, Dutton, Blackburn, Lewis & Longley, P.A., Tampa, for Defendant.
FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on the motion of Defendant, PROGRESSIVE AUTO PRO INSURANCE COMPANY, for final summary judgment and the Court having heard argument of counsel, having considered the authorities, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, the Court makes the following findings:
1. Plaintiff has brought a claim for personal injury protection benefits.
2. Prior to receiving medical treatment from this Plaintiff, the insured sought medical treatment from the Nucci Medical Center.
3. Pursuant to treatment received at the Nucci Medical Center, the insured, David Hill, executed an Assignment of Benefits whereby he assigned, “my insurance benefits and any and all causes of action available under my policy of automobile insurance” to the Nucci Medical Center.
4. This Assignment of benefits was clear and unambiguous.
5. “Only the insured or the medical provider “owns” the cause of action against the insurer at any one time. And the one that owns the claim must bring the action if an action is to be brought.” See Oglesby v. State Farm, 781 So.2d 469 (Fla. 5th DCA, 2001), Multicare Medical Center, Inc., v. State Farm Fire and Casualty, 10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 724a (11th Judicial Circuit 2003).
6. “Once made, an assignment of the insured’s interest in personal injury protection benefits to a medical services provider is irrevocable.” See Superior Insurance Co. v. Libert, 776 So.2d 360 (Fla. 5th DCA, 2001) citing State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gonnella, 677 So. 2d 1355 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).
7. “Because an unqualified assignment transfers to the assignee all the interest of the assignor under the assigned contract, assignor has no right to make any claim on the contract once the assignment is complete, unless authorized to do so by the assignee.” See State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. Ray, 556 So.2d 811 (Fla. 5th DCA, 1990).
8. Here, the insured, David Hill assigned “any and all causes of action” under his policy to the Nucci Medical Center.
9. Because the insured, assignor, issued an unqualified assignment to the assignee, Plaintiff, he assigned all the interest of the assignor under the assigned contract.
10. The law of assignments yields a harsh result in this case.
11. As such, assignee, Plaintiff has no right to make any claim on the insurance contract with Defendant.
12. Only the Nucci Medical Center owns a cause of action against the insurer.
13. Plaintiff has no cause of action against Defendant, Progressive.
ADJUDGED that Final Summary Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant, AUTO PRO INSURANCE COMPANY, that Plaintiff, ROSE RADIOLOGY CENTERS, INC., take nothing by this action, and Defendant, PROGRESSIVE AUTO PRO INSURANCE COMPANY go hence without day.
This Court certifies the following question to be of great public importance:
“Does an unqualified assignment of PIP benefits by the PIP insured to a treating physician on a form prepared by the treating physician assign all of the interest of the assignor under the assigned contract, leaving the assignor or subsequent treating physicians who have accepted assignment from the assignor, with no right to make any claim on the contract once the assignment to the first provider is complete?”
* * *
