5 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 484a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Insured’s action against insurer to recover unpaid PIP benefits — Insured lacks standing to sue with respect to those benefits which were assigned to medical providers, and insurer’s motion to dismiss those claims is granted — Insured has standing to bring action related to claims which arose subsequent to date assignment was revoked — Insurer’s motion to dismiss claims relating to certain medical provider denied because court cannot determine if document titled “Authorization to Pay Physician” is in fact an assignment of benefits — Insurer may conduct limited discovery relating to authorization to pay without waiving right to compel arbitration
FRANCIA GEORGES, Plaintiff, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court in and for Pinellas County, Civil Division. Case No. 97-6461-CO-42. February 25, 1998. Stephen O. Rushing, Judge. Counsel: Barry E. Berger, Law Offices of Berger and Dowling, Palm Harbor, for Plaintiff. Manuel J. Alvarez, Rywant, Alvarez, Jones, Russo & Guyton, Tampa, for Defendant.
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
This cause came on to be heard upon Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on February 17, 1998, and the Court having heard argument of counsel and being otherwise fully advised in the premises the Court finds that:
1. On September 8, 1997, Plaintiff, FRANCIA GEORGES, sued Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company for nonpayment of PIP benefits.
2. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss alleges that Plaintiff assigned her PIP benefits to certain medical providers and thus, pursuant to Florida Statute § 627.736(5), lacks standing capacity to sue. Defendant further alleges an entitlement to arbitrate directly with those medical providers who have accepted an assignment of benefits from the Plaintiff.
3. Defendant has informed the Court that two of Plaintiff’s medical providers, Sensory Neurodiagnostics, Inc. and Dr. William Scott Russell, have made demand upon Defendant for arbitration under assignments of benefits executed by the Plaintiff.
4. The Court has been advised that the assignment of benefits given to Dr. Barbara J. Lubben was revoked on June 2, 1997.
5. The Court cannot, at this time, determine if the document titled “Authorization to Pay Physician” is in fact an assignment of benefits from Plaintiff to Michael J. DeVito, D.D.S.
Upon the foregoing facts it is therefore
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
6. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss all claims relating to Sensory Neurodiagnostics, Inc. is hereby GRANTED.
7. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss all claims relating to Dr. William Scott Russell is hereby GRANTED.
8. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss all claims relating to Dr. Barbara J. Lubben, dated prior to June 2, 1997, is treated as a Motion to Strike and is hereby GRANTED. However, Plaintiff has standing to bring this action related to those claims which arose subsequent to the date of revocation of the assignment, and to that extent the Motion is DENIED.
9. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss all claims relating to Michael J. DeVito, D.D.S. is hereby DENIED without prejudice to the Defendant to show, in an evidentiary hearing, the existence of an assignment of benefits from the Plaintiff to Michael J. DeVito, D.D.S.
10. Defendant may conduct limited discovery relating to Dr. Michael J. DeVito’s “Authorization to Pay” without waiving its right to compel arbitration.
* * *
