17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 287a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1704LONGInsurance — Personal injury protection — Subrogation or reimbursement of PIP benefits — Declaratory judgment — Where neither insured nor insurer is in doubt as to rights or interpretation of statute controlling insurer’s claim for subrogation or reimbursement of PIP benefits, insured’s request for declaration of proper dollar amount that should be claimed is dismissed
KACI LONG, Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 4th Judicial Circuit in and for Duval County. Case No. 09 CC 10760, Division I. January 5, 2010. Pauline M. Drake, Judge. Counsel: Stephen Watrel, Stephen Watrel, P.A., Jacksonville, for Plaintiff. David B. Kampf, Ramey & Kampf, P.A., Tampa, for Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST SEEKING DECLARATORY RELIEF JUDGMENT
This Court having had the opportunity to review the complaint as filed and to review all documents filed in this case makes the following finding of law and fact.
FACT:
This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 86.11, Florida Statutes.
Kaci Long, the plaintiff in this case is insured by State Farm Insurance and was so insured on the date she was involved in an automobile accident in which she was hit from the back. The other individual in the accident was also insured by State Farm. Pursuant to Florida Statute 768.76, State Farm advised the plaintiff of its intent to claim subrogation or reimbursement for any payments received. There is no dispute that Florida Statute 768.76 is controlling.
In response to this, the plaintiff requested from State Farm the amount it intended to claim as a result of subrogation or reimbursement. At the hearing on October 26, 2009, the plaintiff argued that without a specified dollar amount, it would be difficult to consider settlement.
LEGAL:
This Court agrees with the defendant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. The primary purpose of the Declaratory Judgment Act is to relieve litigants of common-law rule that no declaration of rights may be judicially adjudged unless a right has been violated for the violation of which right relief maybe granted and to render practical help in ending controversies which have not been reached the stage where other legal relief is immediately available. Bell vs. Associated Independents, Inc., 143 So.2d 904 (Fla. App. 1962).
Also, it appears that in this cause that neither plaintiff or defendant are in any doubt over their rights or the interpretation on Section 768.76, Florida Statutes. This case involves the proper dollar amount, if any that should be claimed. Plaintiff must establish that there is a bona fide, actual, and present need for the declaration. This burden has not been met. The only remedy under the Complaint that this Court would be required to find is whether or not the parties were required to comply with the statute. In this case, both parties agree with the interpretation of statute. However, a declaratory judgment should not be excluded as a remedy simply because monetary relief is sought. Jacksonville Expressway Authority v. Duval County, 189 So. 2d 837 (Fla. App. 1966).
Therefore no statutory interpretation and declaratory judgment is needed. Section 86.101 is clear:
“This chapter is declared to be substantive and remedial.” Its purpose is to settle and to afford relief from insecurity and uncertainty with respect to rights, status, and other equitable or legal relations and is to be liberally administered and construed.”
In the instant case, however, legal remedies are clearly set out in Fla. Statute 768.76(5). The legislature has gone to great length to codify the law of personal injury protection. Therefore, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
The Motion to Dismiss is hereby GRANTED and that the plaintiff may have leave to state a cause of action under Section 768.76, Florida Statutes.
