Case Search

Please select a category.

BIGLEY & ASSOCIATES, P.A., d/b/a PREMIER ORTHOPEDICS OF ORLANDO as assignee of MATTHEW ANTOLICK, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 265a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Request to produce any explanation of benefits indicating allowed amount greater than 200% of Medicare Part B Fee Schedule within 90 days of date of service at issue is overbroad

BIGLEY & ASSOCIATES, P.A., d/b/a PREMIER ORTHOPEDICS OF ORLANDO as assignee of MATTHEW ANTOLICK, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 9th Judicial Circuit in and for Orange County. Case No. 07-SC-2032. January 10, 2008. Nancy Clark, Judge. Counsel: George Milev, Adams & Diaco, P.A., Tampa. Michelle Kelson.

ORDER

THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery, upon hearing arguments by counsels for Plaintiff and Defendant and otherwise being fully advised in the premises the Court FINDS, ORDERS AND ADJUDGES as follows:

1. Plaintiff, a medical provider, filed the above styled lawsuit against Defendant alleging breach of insurance contract providing PIP benefits to Matthew Antolick.

2. On August 6, 2007 Plaintiff propounded Request to Produce to Defendant.

3. Paragraph 5 of said Request to Produce asked:

Please produce any EOB representing the final decision for payment in a PIP claim that indicates an “allowed amount” greater than 200% of the Florida Medicare Part B Fee Schedule. Only produce those EOB’s that are generated within 90 days of the dates of service at issue in the Complaint. Please redact the EOB’s to be in compliance with HIPPA.

4. Defendant responded as follows:

Objection, not relevant, privilege, work product, over broad, unduly burdensome, harassment.

5. Without ruling on the rest of the objections, Defendant’s objection of “over broad” is hereby SUSTAINED.

6. Defendant agrees to provide better responses without objections to paragraphs 3 and 6 of Plaintiff’s Request to Produce dated August 6, 2007.

7. Defendant shall provide better responses to paragraphs 3 and 6 within 30 days of this Order.

Skip to content