Case Search

Please select a category.

PALM BEACH SPINE & DIAGNOSTIC INSTITUTE, PA (a/a/o MARY BARKELY), Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 509a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2005BARKInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Policy language providing that insurer will pay 80% of reasonable medical expenses controls over permissive statutory fee schedule where policy makes no reference to statutory fee schedule

PALM BEACH SPINE & DIAGNOSTIC INSTITUTE, PA (a/a/o MARY BARKELY), Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County. Case No 502012SC004140XXXXSB. January 14, 2013. Honorable Daliah H. Weiss, Judge. Counsel: Abraham S. Ovadia, Florida PIP Law Firm, PA, Boca Raton, for Plaintiff. Seth Alper, Matt Hellman PA, Plantation, for Defendant

.ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIALSUMMARY JUDGMENT THAT SPECIFIC LANGUAGEOF THE INSURANCE POLICY CONTROLSOVER THE PERMISSIVE LANGUAGE OFFLORIDA STATUTE 627.736(5)(a)

THIS CAUSE having come before this Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment that Specific Language Of The Insurance Policy Controls Over The Permissive Language Of Florida Statute 627.736(5)(a), the Parties being in agreement, and this Court being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby,

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Re: Kingsway is GRANTED.

2. The Defendant’s policy language is controlling over the permissive statutory language. The Court finds that under the holdings of Kingsway Amigo Insurance Company v. Ocean Health, Inc. (a/a/o Belizaire Gomez) 63 So. 3d 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) [36 Fla. L. Weekly D1062a] and Geico Indemnity Company v. Virtual Imaging Services, Inc. 79 So.3d 55 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2011) [36 Fla. L. Weekly D2597a], the fee schedule was not permitted to be applied in this case as the applicable policy “made no reference to the permissive methodology of subsection 627.736(5)(a)2” Id.

3. The Defendant must pay in accordance with its policy on insurance and pay 80% of reasonable medical expenses. The reasonableness of the charges are still at issue.

* * *

Skip to content