14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 877b
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Dispute between insured and insurer — Where insured assigned PIP benefits to medical provider in assignment providing that it could only be revoked by written consent of provider, alleged revocation not signed by provider is invalid, and insured lacks standing to bring suit against insurer
JENNIFER MOFFETT, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 4th Judicial Circuit in and for Duval County. Case No. 07-CC-2118, Division O. June 26, 2007. Richard G. Weinberg, Judge. Counsel: Jay S. Grife, Jacksonville. Lindsay A. Cole, Jacksonville.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE, having came before the Court on June 26, 2007, on Defendant’s Motion for Final Summary Judgment, and the Court having heard arguments of counsel, reviewed the pleadings and motion and being otherwise advised in the premises, it is,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Defendant’s Motion for Final Summary Judgment is GRANTED without prejudice.
2. Plaintiff filed suit against PROGRESSIVE for failure to pay Personal Injury Protection benefits for treatment rendered by Neurology Partners and Accident Care and Wellness.
3. During the course of discovery, Defendant obtained Assignments of Benefits from Plaintiff to Neurology Partners and to Accident Care and Wellness.
4. The Assignment of Benefits to Neurology Partners in its pertinent part states: “This is a direct assignment of my rights and benefits under any such policy of insurance and may only be revoked with express written consent of Neurology Partners, P.A.”
5. The Assignment of Benefits to Accident Care and Wellness in its pertinent part states:“THIS IS A DIRECT OF ASSIGNMENT OF MY RIGHTS AND BENEFITS UNDER THE POLICY.”
6. In response to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff filed with the court a document titled, “Direct Payment Authorization Without Assignment of Benefits and/or Revocation of Assignment and/or Reassignment of Benefits.”
7. The document in its pertinent part states: “IN THE EVENT THAT THERE WAS EVER AN ASSIGNMENT OF BENEFITS TO THE MEDICAL PROVIDER BY SIGNING BELOW THE MEDICAL PROVIDER AGREES THAT ANY AND ALL ASSIGNMENTS OF BENEFITS HAVE BEEN REVOKED AND/OR REASSIGNED TO THE INSURED.”
8. The document was signed only by the Plaintiff insured, Jennifer Moffett, and not by Neurology Partners and Accident Care and Wellness. (A key undisputed finding)
9. An unqualified assignment transfers to the assignee all the interest of the assignor under the contract at issue and the 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 & Cas. Co. v. Ray, 556 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).
10. At any one time, only the insured or the medical provider “owns” the cause of action against an insurer for PIP benefits. See Oglesby v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,781 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
11. There remain no genuine issues as to any facts pertaining right of action by any appropriate party. Plaintiff assigned her insurance benefits to Neurology Partners and Accident Care and Wellness. The alleged revocation was invalid on its face because it was not signed by said providers. The Plaintiff does not “own” this cause of action at this time and the medical providers are the proper parties at this time that should have brought the lawsuit regarding their bills.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff, JENNIFER MOFFETT, take nothing by this action without prejudice and Defendant PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, shall go hence from this date only. This shall not preclude any proper party from maintaining any law suit arising from the auto accident (FS 627.736) under provisions of existing insurance.
