24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 147c
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2402DMILInsurance — Standing — Assignment — Issues of fact regarding specific rights and benefits assigned to plaintiff and services performed preclude summary judgment in favor of insurer — No merit to argument that subsequent assignments related to covered loss are invalid as matter of law
THE KIDWELL GROUP, LLC d/b/a AIR QUALITY ASSESSORS OF FLORIDA, as assignee of DOROTHY MILLER, Plaintiff, vs. FLORIDA PENINSULA INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 6th Judicial Circuit in and for Pinellas County, Small Claims Division. Case No. 15-1758-SC-46. UCN 522015SC001758XXSCSC. November 17, 2015. Edwin B. Jagger, Judge. Counsel: Daniel Gutierrez and Lindsey Copeland, Daniel Guiterrez, P.A., Orlando, for Plaintiff. Andrew A. Labbe, Groelle & Salmon, P.A., Tampa, for Defendant.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This cause came before the Court on October 15, 2015, on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, and the Court having considered the motion and argument of counsel, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. On the record presented, as it relates to the subject standing issue, issues of fact exist regarding the specific rights and benefits assigned to Plaintiff, as well as the actual services performed. This Court recognizes the case, Dunedin Restoration Services, Inc. v. Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Co., Case No. 13-000033AP-88B (Pinellas County Cir. Ct. 2014), but disagrees with Defendant that it stands for the blanketed proposition that any subsequent assignment relating to a covered loss is invalid as a matter of law. To make that determination for summary judgment, the facts of each case must be developed and undisputed.
