14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 71a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Reasonable, related and necessary expenses — Summary judgment is granted in favor of medical provider where, although insurer claims in answer that charges were not reasonable, defense is not presented in verified format, no affidavit has been filed in opposition to motion for summary judgment, and only evidence before court at time of hearing on motion is provider’s affidavit stating that charges were reasonable
J. MARK RENFROE D.C. dba RENFROE SPINAL CENTER, a/a/o Kelly B. Anderson, Sr., Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE AUTO PRO INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 1st Judicial Circuit in and for Escambia County. Case No. 2005 SC 004142, Division V. November 20, 2006. Pat Kinsey, Judge. Counsel: Eric D. Stevenson, Law Office of David Lee Sellers, Pensacola, for Plaintiff. William D. Anderson, for Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
At a hearing on plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment on a series of three cases on November 16, 2006, the parties appeared through counsel. The court heard argument of counsel, reviewed the case law and memoranda submitted and finds that this series of cases turns on a simple procedural issue.
Plaintiff seeks reimbursement for reductions taken from HCFA invoices billing for services rendered subsequent to a motor vehicle collision subject to PIP coverage provided by defendant. Defendant, through its Answer, claims the charges were “not reasonable.” However, the affirmative defenses are not presented in a “verified” format. Neither was an affidavit filed in opposition to plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
Plaintiff filed Dr. Renfroe’s affidavit stating with sufficient specificity that the charges were “reasonable” and why they were so. Defendant, although no doubt planning to produce expert witnesses at trial to explain that the charges were not “reasonable,” failed to present any evidence of that fact. Therefore, at the time of the hearing, the only evidence before the court is plaintiff’s affidavit. Had the defendant presented an affidavit from an appropriate “expert” challenging Dr. Renfroe’s affidavit, the court would have no choice but to reject plaintiff’s claim. However, other than taking judicial notice of certain federal guidelines where there is no evidence tying them to plaintiff’s case, there is no evidence before the court that the charges were other than reasonable and therefore it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted. The court reserves jurisdiction over the issue of attorney’s fees and costs and other matter necessary to conclude this business before the court.
