fbpx

Case Search

Please select a category.

UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO., Appellant, v. OPEN MRI OF MIAMI DADE, LTD a/a/o Rosa Castillo, Appellee.

27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 791b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2709CASTInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Reasonableness of charges — Summary judgment — Error to strike insurer’s expert affidavit and enter summary judgment on reasonableness issue

UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO., Appellant, v. OPEN MRI OF MIAMI DADE, LTD a/a/o Rosa Castillo, Appellee. Circuit Court. 11th Judicial Circuit (Appellate) in and for Miami-Dade County. Case No. 2017-326-AP-01. L.T. Case No. 2012-014482-SP-23. November 6, 2019. On Appeal from the County Court in and for Miami-Dade County, Judge Caryn Schwartz. Counsel: Michael J. Neimand, for Appellant. Kenneth Dorchak and Chad Barr, for Appellee.

OPINION

(Before MILTON HIRSCH, ALAN FINE, and MIGUEL DE LA O, JJ.)

(PER CURIAM.) We find the trial court erred in striking Appellant’s expert’s affidavit and granting summary judgment on the issue of reasonableness. See United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Miami Dade County MRI, Corp. a/a/o Marta Figueredo, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. [506b] (Online Reference No. FLWSUPP 2706FIGU) (11th Jud. Cir., July 30, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Miami Dade County MRI, Corp. a/a/o Javier Rodriguez, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 225c (11th Jud. Cir., July 25, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Miami Dade County MRI, Corp. a/a/o Rene Dechard, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 226a (11th Jud. Cir., August 12, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Millennium Radiology, LLC a/a/o Javier Rodriguez, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 911b (11th Jud. Cir., July 19, 2019). Accordingly, the summary judgment and final judgment entered below are hereby REVERSED, and this cause is REMANDED to the trial court.

Appellee’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is DENIED. Appellant’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is conditionally GRANTED (conditioned upon Appellant ultimately prevailing and the enforceability of the proposal for settlement) and REMANDED to the trial court to fix amount. (HIRSCH, FINE, AND DE LA O, JJ., concur.)

Skip to content