Case Search

Please select a category.

THE HEALTHPLACE, INC., (as assignee of Victor Vachez), Plaintiff, v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1011c

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Insurer breached PIP policy by failing to furnish medical provider with explanation of benefits and copy of policy and endorsements requested in demand letter — Standing — Assignment to name that differed from plaintiff’s name is sufficient to confer standing

THE HEALTHPLACE, INC., (as assignee of Victor Vachez), Plaintiff, v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County, County Civil Division. Case No. 07-24686, Division “L”. August 7, 2008. Joelle Ann Ober, Judge. Counsel: Timothy A. Patrick, Nicholas & Patrick, P.A., Tampa, for Plaintiff, Michael Liebgold, Luks, Santaniello, Perez, Petrillo & Gold, for Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

THIS CAUSE, having come before the court on June 4, 2008, on Plaintiff’s Motion For Partial Summary Judgment with Timothy A. Patrick, Esquire for the Plaintiff and Michael Liebgold, Esquire for the Defendant, and the court having reviewed the file and heard argument of counsel, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Court finds that the Defendant breached the policy of insurance by failing to comply with Florida Statute 627.736(4)(b) in providing valid explanation of benefits (EOB) including an itemized statement for all charges submitted by the Plaintiff.

2. Further, the Court finds that the Defendant breached the policy of insurance by failing to provide a copy of the insurance policy and all endorsements as provided by Fla. Statute 627.4137 to the Plaintiff after it was requested in the Plaintiff’s pre-suit demand letter.

3. Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is HEREBY GRANTED.

4. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding Plaintiff’s Lack of Standing argued that Plaintiff’s Assignment of Benefits was defective inasmuch as it is to an entity other than “The Healthplace, Inc.”, the named Plaintiff in this case. Specifically, the subject assignment is given to “The Healthplace, a private medical practice of David P. Kalin, M.D., M.P.H.”

5. The court finds the subject assignment is sufficient to confer standing.

6. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is HEREBY DENIED.

Skip to content