13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 187a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Dispute between insured and insurer — Standing — Assignment — Where insured executed assignment of benefits in favor of medical provider, and there is no evidence of a reassignment of benefits from provider to insured at or before suit was filed, insured lacks standing to proceed in suit against insurer
ROGELIA S. MENDEZ, Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, A foreign corporation, Defendant. County Court, 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County. Case No. 04-06470 COSO 60. September 8, 2005. Sharon L. Zeller, Judge. Counsel: Mark Feinstein, for Plaintiff. Gregory P. Hengber and Stephen M. Rosansky, Hengber, Goldstein & Ray, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE having come before this Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and this Court, having heard argument from counsel and the Court being fully advised in the premises, it is hereby:
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
Plaintiff, ROGELIA S. MENDEZ, was involved in a motor vehicle accident on or about April 5, 2003, wherein she sustained injuries. Ms. Mendez went to Kendall Medical Center where she received medical treatment and executed a document entitled, “Consent for Treatment and Conditions of Admission,” which contained in no uncertain terms an assignment of benefits and agreement to be bound by the charges submitted by the hospital. Paragraph number seven of the “Consent for Treatment and Conditions of Admission,” states as follows:
7. ASSIGNMENT OF INSURANCE BENEFITS: In the even the patient is entitled to hospital benefits arising out of any policy of insurance insuring the patient or any other party liable to the patient, said benefits are hereby assigned to the hospital for application on patient’s bill, and it is agreed that the hospital may receipt for any such payment and such payment will discharge the said insurance company of any or all obligation under the policy to the extent of such payment. (emphasis added)
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”), upon receipt of the bills and in reliance upon the Assignment of Benefits from Kendall Medical Center made payment of Personal Injury Protection Benefits in accordance with Florida Statutes and the subject policy of insurance, thus fulfilling its obligations under said policy. In fact, State Farm paid the bills in full, at 80%, without reduction.
Plaintiff, ROGELIA S. MENDEZ, subsequently filed the instant suit against State Farm claiming that, although State Farm had paid the bills submitted by Kendall Medical Center in full (at 80%), without reduction, Plaintiff now considered the bills to be “outrageous” and “not reasonable or customary” thereby alleging that State Farm had breached the contract of insurance under which Plaintiff’s claim was being made. Defendant, State Farm, filed the instant Motion to Dismiss alleging that Plaintiff, ROGELIA S. MENDEZ, had no standing to either bring or maintain the present action against State Farm as she had assigned his rights under the policy of insurance and could no longer contest the reasonableness of the charges submitted by the healthcare provider and paid by State Farm.
After hearing argument and being apprised of all relevant and applicable case law, this Court agrees that Plaintiff does not have standing to bring or maintain the present action by virtue of having assigned his benefits and rights in favor of the health care provider, thereby forfeiting any right to contest reasonableness of a charge subsequently submitted by the assignee.
An assignment is defined as “a transfer or setting over of property or of some right or interest therein, from one person to another. It is the act by which one person transfers to another, or causes to vest in another, his right of property or interest therein.” 4 Fla.Jur.2d, Assignments § 1 (1978). State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. Ray, 556 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990) (If there is an assignment, the insured’s rights and benefits under his or her policy of insurance properly vest in the assignee). Once made, an assignment of the insured’s interest in personal injury protection benefits to a medical services provider is irrevocable. See Rittman v. Allstate Ins. Co., 727 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Gonnella, 677 So.2d 1355, 1356-57 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).
Because an unqualified assignment transfers to the assignee all the interest of the assignor under the assigned contract, the assignor has no right to make any claim on the contract once the assignment is complete. Accordingly, once a party assigns his or her rights, he or she has no standing to file suit. Superior Ins. Co. v. Libert, 776 So. 2d 360 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). See State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. Ray, 556 So.2d 811 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). In such a case, an insured would no longer have a right to sue under the subject policy. See Spears v. West Coast Builders Supply Co., 133 So.97 (Fla. 1931). See also Orion Ins. Co. v. Magnetic Imaging System, I, 696 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).
Plaintiff must have standing to assert a claim at the time of filing its Complaint, and such deficiency cannot be cured after the fact. The general rule is that the right of the complainant to the relief prayed must be determined by the facts existing at the time of the lawsuit was filed. Shackelford v. Old Dominion Ins. Co., 6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 335 (Fla. 20th Cir Ct., Jan 20, 1999). A filing defect cannot ordinarily be remedied by the acquisition or accrual of a cause of action while the suit is pending. Meredith v. Long, 119 So.2d 114 (Fla. 1928). See also Fortune Insurance Company v. Ralph Lugo, 7 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 435b (11th Circuit Appellate Court, Miami-Dade County April 4, 2000).
Accordingly, due to the evidence supporting the existence of an assignment of benefits from the Plaintiff in favor of Kendall Medical Center and the lack of any evidence reassigning same to the Plaintiff at or before the time the suit was filed, Plaintiff lacks standing to proceed. As such, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and must dismiss this cause. See Medical Rehab and Therapy Center v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 7 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 686a (13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County July 28, 2000).
For the foregoing reasons Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is hereby GRANTED. This Court retains jurisdiction over attorney’s fees and costs, as well as Defendant’s outstanding Motion for Sanctions pursuant to §57.105, Florida Statutes.
* * *
