21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 803b
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2108RCASInsurance — Personal injury protection — Affirmative defenses — Accord and satisfaction — Cashing of checks containing language stating that checks were for full and final PIP benefits for bills constituted accord and satisfaction — Affidavit filed by medical provider stating that checks were not cashed with intent of accepting them as full and final payment is not sufficient to create issue of fact
URGENT FAMILY CARE, INC. a/a/o RODRIGO ALONSO CASTRO, Plaintiff, vs. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Defendant. County Court, 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Civil Division. Case No. 12-5843 SP 25 (03). April 29, 2014. Patricia Marino Pedraza, Judge. Counsel: Todd Landau, for Plaintiff. Jon Sorensen, Office of the General Counsel, United Aut Ins. Co., for Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING THE DEFENDANTSMOTION FOR FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENTREGARDING ACCORD & SATISFACTION ANDFINAL JUDGMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT
THIS MATTER having come before the Court on February 26, 2014 on the Defendant’s Motion for Final Summary Judgment regarding Accord & Satisfaction, and the Court, after reviewing all the evidence, hearing argument of counsel and reviewing pertinent case law, makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law;
1. The Defendant presented evidence that five sets of bills were submitted to the Defendant by the Plaintiff pertaining to the treatment of Rodrigo Alonso Castro relating to an automobile accident that occurred while he was covered by a policy of PIP insurance issued by the Defendant.
2. In response, the Defendant issued five drafts, one pertaining to each set of bills submitted, and all containing similar language indicating United Auto’s intent that the drafts constitute full and final payment of the respective bills.
3. Each draft contained the following language in the Pay to the Order of section, “URGENT FAMILY CARE, INC. F/A/O RODRIGO ALONSO CASTRO for Full and Final PIP Benefits for Bill ID 7777-H-XXXXXX.”1
4. All five drafts were cashed by the Plaintiff.
5. An accord and satisfaction results as a matter of law “when the creditor accepts payment tendered on the expressed condition that its receipt is deemed to be a complete satisfaction of a disputed issue.” See St. Mary’s Hospital, Inc. v. Schocoff, 725 So.2d 454, (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) [24 Fla. L. Weekly D405a].
6. Appellate Courts have “long held that cashing a check containing language that it is in full payment of the debtor’s obligations creates an accord and satisfaction with regard to the claim for which payment was tendered.” See Eder v. Yvette B. Gervey Interiors, Inc., 407 So.2d 312 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Ennia Gen. Ins. Co., Ltd. v. Auld, 506 So.2d 62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); see also Mortell v. Keith, Mack, Lewis & Allison, 528 So.2d 1362 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).
7. This Court finds that the cashing of the above referenced drafts constituted an accord and satisfaction by operation of law.
8. The affidavit filed by the Plaintiff of the records custodian/corporate representative, dated of December 12, 2013, stating that the checks were not cashed with the intent of accepting same as full and final payment is not sufficient to create an issue of fact.
9. The drafts tendered by United Auto clearly indicate that they were intended as payment in full and by cashing the drafts, Urgent Family Care accepted them in full satisfaction of the claim.
10. This Court also considered the criteria set forth in §673.3111, Florida Statutes, Accord and Satisfaction by use of Instrument, and finds that the Defendant has met its prima facie burden and the undisputed facts of the instant matter reveal that the Defendant has satisfied all elements set forth in §673.3111.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Defendant’s Motion for Final Summary Judgment regarding Accord & Satisfaction is hereby GRANTED and Final Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the Defendant, United Automobile Insurance Company. The Plaintiff, Urgent Family Care, Inc. a/a/o Rodrigo Alonso Castro shall take nothing from this action and the Defendant shall go hence without day.
__________________
1Each draft contained a different bill ID number that correlated to one of the five sets of bills submitted by the Plaintiff. Other than that, the language was identical on each draft.
* * *
