19 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 591b
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1907VELAInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Lawfully rendered services — Medical provider that is health care clinic, not massage establishment, and holds valid health care clinic license from Agency for Health Care Administration was not required to have massage establishment license in order to lawfully render massage services
PACIFIC MEDICAL & REHAB CENTER a/a/o JORGE F. VELASQUEZ, Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County. Case No. 2007-05450 SP 26, Section 03. January 19, 2012. Michaelle Gonzalez-Paulson, Judge. Counsel: Maria Corredor, Law Offices of Corredor & Husseini, P.A., Miami, for Plaintiff. Jonathan Brooks, for Defendant.
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED CROSSMOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT REGARDINGMASSAGE LICENSE AND ON DEFENDANT’SMOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This Cause came before the Court on November 22, 2011, The Court having considered the subject motion (s) and supporting affidavits, documentary exhibits, case law authority, the oral argument of counsel, the Court file and all relevant pleadings contained therein, and being otherwise apprised in the premises hereby enters the following ruling.
Fla. Stat. 400.903(3) defines “clinic” is “an entity at which health care services are provided to individuals and which tenders reimbursement for such services.”
Fla. Stat. 400.905 provides that entities at which health care services are provided must be licensed and at all times maintain a valid license with the Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA).
The purpose behind the licensure requirement is to ensure that the facilities providing health care services do so in a sanitary environment that is subject to inspection.
This purpose is delineated in Fla. Stat. 400.901(2) which calls for the regulation of health care clinics to prevent significant harm to consumers through the enforcement of basic standards for such clinics and the provision of an administrative oversight agency in AHCA.Argument
In the instant case, Plaintiff is a health care clinic properly licensed by AHCA and therefore subject to the regulations under which it must operate in order to serve the purposes of Fla. Stat. 400.901(2).
At the time that treatments were rendered to JORGE F. VELASQUEZ, Plaintiff was licensed by AHCA.
Moreover, any massage services rendered to JORGE F. VELASQUEZ were provided by PACIFIC MEDICAL & REHAB CENTER, while holding a valid AHCA license at the time any such massage treatment was provided.
The holding of a valid clinic license from AHCA serves the purpose of ensuring that Plaintiff’s facility, at which JORGE F. VELASQUEZ was treated, was subject to regulation, oversight and inspection and thus met all conditions necessary to allow Plaintiff to operate and provide lawful health care services.
Plaintiff is not required to have a massage establishment license because it is not a massage establishment but a health care clinic and it had the valid licenses to operate pursuant to its status.
Plaintiff employed medical and/or chiropractic physicians that ordered, prescribed and/or were responsible for the supervision of all treatment provided to Plaintiff’s assignor (i.e. the at-issue treatment). Said medical and/or chiropractic physician’s professions, practice and training and expertise allowed for them to order, prescribe and/or perform (directly and/or indirectly) massage services to Plaintiff’s assignor (the patient).
Although Plaintiff, may be described as “. . .a facility wherein a licensed massage therapist practices massage for compensation. . . ,” Plaintiff nonetheless remains an AHCA licensed clinic, where the treating physician/medical director’s practice or profession overlaps with the practice of massage,” and therefore the Defendant’s contention that Plaintiff did not render lawful treatment remains without merit.
(See TERESITA MEDICAL CENTER INC., a/a/o YOLANDA ARENCIBIA, Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Civil Division. Case No. 07-21497 SP 05 (08). November 29, 2010. Wendell M. Graham, Judge.) [18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 304a]
ORDERED and ADJUDGED, as follows: Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment re Plaintiff’s Failure to Lawfully Render Treatment due to the Alleged Failure of Plaintiff to Maintain a Massage Establishment License is hereby DENIED. Plaintiff’s Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment re Massage Establishment is hereby GRANTED.
* * *
