13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 392a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Equitable — Where law allows assignment to be written, oral, or both, insured unequivocally stated intent to transfer right to have emergency services paid to ambulance service that transported him to hospital, parties acted in accord with that intent, and insurer would be justified in paying debt to ambulance service as it is entity that provided emergency services to insured, valid assignment exists
RURAL METRO AMBULANCE, as assignee John Pierre, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 18th Judicial Circuit in and for Seminole County. Case No. 04-SC-1933. August 18, 2005. John Sloop, Judge. Counsel: Rutledge M. Bradford, Rutledge Bradford, Orlando. Michael. Liebgold, St. Petersburg.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS MATTER having come before this Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and this Court having heard arguments of counsel and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
The Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby denied. This exact assignment has been the source of three published opinions and numerous others that have not been published. This very court has previously ruled that this is a valid assignment in Rural Metro Ambulance, Inc. a/a/o Ashley Billings vs. Progressive Express Insurance Company, 11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 568a (April 2004), holding, “The Defendant’s Motion to dismiss for lack of standing is denied. The Defendant has asserted that Florida Law requires an assignment to be in writing and absent a written assignment, the Plaintiff’s claim must fail. The court notes that an assignment can be express or implied by the circumstances. The true test is whether the debtor would be justified in paying the debt to the person claiming as the assignee McClure vs. Century Estates, 120 So. 4 (Fla. 1928). Further, Florida law recognized both express and implied assignments. Assignments required no specific form. Formal requisites of such an assignment are not prescribed by statute and may be accomplished by parol, by instrument in writing or other mode such as delivery of evidences of the debt, as may demonstrate as intent to transfer and an acceptance of it. Boulevard National Bank of Miami vs. Air Metal Industries, Inc., 176 So.2d 94 (Fla. 1965). In addition to this ruling, the honorable court has recently held the same assignment to be valid in Rural Metro Ambulance a/a/o Frank Cipris vs. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company.
Additionally, this same assignment was again challenged in Orange County before the Hon. Leon Cheek in Rural Metro Ambulance Inc. a/a/o Aletha Bryant vs. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 583a (April 2004). In granting the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, the court noted, “The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this claim is untenable. The facts show that the insured died while hospitalized for her injuries and the Defendant’s suggestion that the Plaintiff must have an assignment in this situation in order to pursue a cause of action is unpersuasive and in contravention of the purpose of the PIP statute. Further, Florida Law provides for an equitable assignment and certainly such a theory is entirely appropriate under the facts of this case.”
Finally, this same assignment was again challenged in Seminole county before the Hon. Mark E. Herr in Rural Metro Ambulance, Inc. a/a/o Jane Critchfield vs. Allstate Insurance Company, 12 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 103a (October, 2004). There, the Defendant once again asserted a lack of standing based on (a) the actual language of the assignment and (b) the fact that it had not been signed. In Critchfield, affidavits of intent of both Ms. Critchfield and Rural Metro Ambulance were filed. After a lengthy and compelling analysis, the court concluded, that the intent of the parties was to effectuate an assignment and noted, “to hold otherwise would result in an unjust result in the fact of the clear intent of the parties. Ms. Critchfield stated her intent and the parties have each acted in accordance with that intent. The law clearly allows for the assignment to be in writing or oral or partially each. The Plaintiff has met this burden and the court finds that a valid assignment exists.”
The law is very clear that a valid equitable assignment exists where it is necessary to effectuate the plain intent of the parties or where to hold otherwise would be unjust. Giles v. SunBank, NA,450 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). No particular words or form of instrument is necessary to effect an equitable assignment, and any language, however informal, which shows an intention on one side to assign a right and an intention on the other side to receive it, if there is valuable consideration, will operate as an effective equitable assignment (Emphasis added). Giles v. Sunbank, NA, 450 So.2d 258 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Assignability of choses in action is the rule rather than the exception and practically the only classes of choses in action which are not assignable are those for personal torts. Parties can generally assign causes of action derived from a contract or a statute. Ginsberg v. Lennar Florida Holdings, Inc., 645 So.2d 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) and Florida Power Corp. v. McNeely, 125 So.2d 311 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960).
Further, the courts have long held that an assignment, unless required by statute to be in writing, may be by parol or other evidence. Tunno v. Robert, 16 Fla. 738, (1878); Mangum v. Susser, 764 So. 2d 653, 25 Fla L. Weekly D1216 (Fla 1st DCA 2000); Protection House, Inc. v. Daverman and Associates, 167 So.2d 65 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964) (the court found an oral agreement to constitute an assignment). Here, there is ample evidence before the court of the parties’ intent. Since Florida does not have a requirement that assignments be in writing, the understanding of the parties, as evidenced by sworn statements and testimony, should stand as evidence of intent in this case.
If questions arise regarding the assignment, the court have indicated the true test of an equitable assignment is whether the debtor would be justified in paying the debt to the person claiming as assignee. Giles, supra. Clearly, in the present case, the Defendant would be justified in paying the debt to Rural Metro Ambulance, as it was the entity which provided the emergency services to Ms. Critchfield in this case.
Finally, the law states that any act, which plainly makes an appropriation of a fund or debt may constitute an equitable assignment. McClure v. Century Estates, 96 Fla. 568 (Fla. 1928). It may be parol, or partly in writing and partly oral and may be completed merely by delivery of the subject assigned. In this case, John Pierre’s intent was to transfer his right to have emergency services paid to the party that transported him, Rural Metro Ambulance. His intent is clear and evidenced in his affidavit.
The Defendant is seeking an unjust result in the face of the clear intent of the parties. Mr. Pierre has unequivocally stated his intent and the parties have each acted in accordance with that intent. The law clearly allows for the assignment in writing or oral or partially each. The Plaintiff has met this burden and a valid assignment exists in this matter.
