25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 756b
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2508IVANInsurance — Personal injury protection — Demand letter — Defects — Failure to attach copy of insurer’s notice withdrawing payment or itemized statement of type, frequency, and duration of future treatment claimed to be reasonable and medically necessary
SOSA FAMILY CHIROPRACTIC CENTER, P.A. D/B/A WESTCHASE CHIROPRACTIC, a/a/o Ivanova, Nataliya, Plaintiff, vs. TRAVELERS COMMERCIAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County, Civil Division. Case No. 15-CC-027242. September 25, 2017. Gaston J. Fernandez, Judge. Counsel: David Wallach, Florida Advocates, Dania Beach, for Plaintiff. David B. Kampf, Ramey & Kampf, P.A., Tampa, for Defendant.
AFFIRMED. FLWSUPP 2609IVAN
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’SMOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE, having come before the Court on August 17, 2017, on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment, and the Court having heard argument of counsel and having reviewed the file and being otherwise advised in the Premises, it is hereupon
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment based on Plaintiff’s non-compliance with Florida Statute §627.736(10) asserting that the Plaintiff’s pre-suit demand letter did not attach a copy of the insurer’s notice withdrawing payment pursuant to Florida Statute §627.736(7)(a) as well as an itemized statement of the type, frequency, and duration of future treatment claimed to be reasonable and medically necessary.
2. Plaintiff filed a response to the Motion for Summary Judgment as well as a cross motion for summary judgment asking the Court to find that the demand letter complied with the statutory requirement per Florida Statute §627.736(10)(a)(3).
3. Defendant asserts the statute required the compliance with the statute as the future services were services rendered after the letter discontinuing future treatment per subpart 7(a). Plaintiff asserts the requirement only applies to future treatment occurring after the demand letter.
4. This Court grants Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment based on the authority of Chambers Medical Group, Inc. (a/a/o Marie St. Hillare) v. Progressive Express Insurance Company, 14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 207(a) (December 1, 2006, 13th Jud. Cir. Appellate) and Progressive Express Ins. Co., Inc. v. Menendez, 979 So.2d 324 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2008) [33 Fla. L. Weekly D811a] and Florida Disc Institute a/a/o Kernizan v. Travelers Home and Marine Ins. Co., 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 362a (Florida 13th Jud. Cir. Hillsborough County June 21, 2016).
5. Therefore, this Court finds that Defendant shall hereby be entitled to summary judgment and, thus, grants the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
6. Plaintiff’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment shall hereby be denied.
