6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 753e
NOT FINAL VERSION OF OPINION
Subsequent Changes at 7 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 239i
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Once made, an assignment of insured’s interest in PIP benefits to a medical provider is irrevocable — Although mutual revocations of assignments authorized by the assignment itself and/or subject insurance policies have been recognized, unilateral revocations of assignment in instant case were invalid
FORTUNE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. RALPH LUGO, Appellee. 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Appellate Division. Case No. 99-047 AP. Lower Case No. 98-00967 CC 25 (01). Opinion filed August 25, 1999. An appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, JOSE M. RODRIGUEZ, Judge. Counsel: Diane Tutt, for Appellant. Eric Shapiro, for Appellee.
(Before STUART M. SIMONS, DAVID L. TOBIN and ROSA I. RODRIGUEZ, JJ.)
(Tobin, J.) PER CURIAM AFFIRMED.
In this appeal, Appellant (“Fortune”) challenges the lower court’s denial of a Motion to Strike. The lower court’s Order denied Appellant the right to arbitration, as to certain personal injury protection (“PIP”) claims. These claims had been assigned by the Appellee to medical providers, but thereafter these assignments were purportedly revoked by the providers.
This Court finds that once made, an assignment of the insured’s interest in personal injury protection benefits to a medical provider is irrevocable. See Section 682.02, Fla. Stat. (1995)1; Rittman v. Allstate Insurance Co., 24 Fla.L.Weekly D687, 688 (Fla. 1st DCA, March 10, 1999); State Farm Automobile Insurance Company v. Gonnella, 677 So. 2d 1355, 1356-57 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Ray, 556 So.2d 811, 813 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990) (“Because an unqualified assignment transfers to the assignee all the interest of the assignor under the assigned contract, the assignor has no right to make any claim on the contract once the assignment is complete, unless authorized to do so by the assignee”). While this Court notes that mutual revocations of assignments authorized by the assignment itself, and/or the subject insurance policies, have been recognized2, that is not the case here. This Court finds that the unilateral revocations of assignment by Drs. Yoham and Lerfelt were invalid. (STUART M. SIMONS and ROSA I. RODRIGUEZ, JJ., concur.)
________
1Section 682.02, Fla. Stat. (1995) provides in pertinent part:
“Two or more parties may agree in writing to submit to arbitration, any controversy existing between them at the time of the agreement, or they may include in a written contract a provision for the settlement of arbitration of any controversy thereafter arising between them relating to such contract or the failure or refusal to perform the whole or any part thereof. Such agreement or provision shall be valid, enforceable and irrevocable without regard to the justiciable character of the controversy…”
2See Poke v. Allstate Indemnity Company, 5 Fla.L.Weekly Supp. 643 (9th Cir. Ct. June 8, 1998); Dooley v. Allstate Insurance Company, 5 Fla.L.Weekly Supp. 520 (12th Cir. Ct. March 31, 1998).
* * *
