12 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1092b
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Declaratory action — Insurer’s obligation to provide PIP log on pre-suit request from medical provider — Insurer is entitled to summary judgment in declaratory action seeking to compel insurer to produce PIP log where provider that sent request for log with demand letter and voluntarily dismissed action for PIP benefits did not require log in order to ascertain rights under policy
SUNCOAST SPINAL MEDICAL & REHAB CENTERS, INC. (as assignee of Suzanne McKibben), Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County. Case No. 04-7551-CC, Division “I”. August 18, 2005. Charlotte W. Anderson, Judge. Counsel: William Perser, for Plaintiff. Karen A. Barnett, Barnett & Associates, P.A., Tampa, for Defendant.
FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT, STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY
THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on July 12, 2005, upon Defendant’s Motion for the Entry of Final Summary Judgment in this cause, and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being otherwise fully advised in the issues, hereby finds as follows:
1. That Plaintiff in this cause filed a Complaint containing two counts for relief. Count I was entitled “Damages for No-fault Benefits” and Count II was entitled “Declaratory Action to Compel the Respondent to Produce a Current PIP Log to the Petitioner.”
2. That immediately prior to the hearing on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, the Plaintiff served a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to Count I of its Complaint. Accordingly, the Court did not address the merits of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Count I.
3. That on February 12, 2004, a company called M&M Billing, Inc. sent a fifteen-day demand to Defendant State Farm, pursuant to Section 627.736(11) of the Florida Statutes. This demand letter also contained a request for an updated PIP log.
4. That although State Farm responded to the fifteen-day demand letter, they did not produce a copy of the PIP log. Plaintiff alleges that State Farm’s failure to provide a PIP log is a violation of Section 627.736(6)(d) and Section 627.7401 of the Florida Statutes which resulted in the Plaintiff being uncertain of its rights and obligations under the policy and Florida law.
5. That the Court finds that there are no disputed issues of material fact with respect to Defendant’s Motion and that Defendant is entitled to Judgment as a matter of law inasmuch as Plaintiff did not require an updated PIP log in order to ascertain its rights under the facts presented in this case.
WHEREUPON, it is hereby ordered and adjudged that Final Summary Judgment be entered in favor of Defendant. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to address Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions and Defendant’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs.
* * *
