18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 314a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1803KATZ
Insurance — Where insurer paid additional amount demanded by medical provider plus interest, but failed to make interest check payable to provider’s attorney as requested, and provider’s counsel did not request substitute check or seek assignment of check prior to filing suit for interest, issue and amount due is so trifling as to preclude litigation — Insurer’s motion for summary judgment and sanctions is granted
JEFFREY L. KATZELL, M.D., P.A. a/a/o Kelly Heatherly, Plaintiff(s), vs. MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY OF FLORIDA, Defendant(s). County Court, 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County. Case No. 09-8619 COCE (55). December 22, 2010. Sharon L. Zeller, Judge. Counsel: George Daven Shirejian, Shirejian & O’Hara, Aventura, for Mercury Insurance Group, for Defendants.
ORDER
THIS CAUSE having come on to be heard by the court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and the court having heard argument of same and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, the court finds as follows:
Plaintiff sent bills to Defendant, Mercury Insurance Company, for services rendered between December 28, 2005 and February 9, 2006. Defendant paid the bills but sent the wrong amount, as the deductible was incorrectly applied. Plaintiff’s counsel sent a demand letter for the difference and within 30 days the Defendant sent the additional amount that was due, plus interest, penalties and postage. Both checks were made out to the Plaintiff.
Plaintiff filed suit. Defendant contacted Plaintiff by phone and by fax to dismiss the suit. Plaintiff had cashed the principal check, but not the interest check in the amount of $75.91 as they had requested it be made payable to the attorney’s office and not the provider. Plaintiff’s counsel could have requested a check made payable to them; gotten an assignment from the Plaintiff; or sent the check back with a request. None of which they did. No lawsuit need have been filed nor litigation pursued.
This court will not condone Plaintiff’s actions. The issue and the amount due is “so trifling” as to preclude the very litigation at issue. In Milton vs. Blackshear, 8 Fla. 161, 169-70 (1858); the Court stated:
[W]ere the error of such an amount as to demand consideration, we might be inclined to give the Defendant a new trial, for the purpose of having it corrected. But the amount of the excess is so trifling, that acting upon the maxim of “de minimus non curet lex,” we are indisposed by remanding the cause, to subject the parties to additional costs, which would probably amount to more than the actual excess of the verdict. The excess in the one case amounts to about nine dollars and in the other about eleven dollars — a sum too small, considering the amount of the principal demand, to subject the patties to further litigation.
Pursuant to “Purchasing Power of Money in the U.S.” website, the amount of approximately $10 in 1958 would be equal to over $270.00 in today’s value. It is obvious that his suit was brought for no other reason than to obtain attorney’s fees. Therefore, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that said Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion For Sanction Pursuant To F.S. §57.105 be, and the same is hereby GRANTED.
