6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 295b
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Motion for judgment on pleadings in which defendant asserts that plaintiff failed to join health care provider as indispensable party denied — Case should not be dismissed for failure to join indispensable party if dismissal would end plaintiff’s claim, and the only claimed prejudice is potential for subsequent litigation by the missing party
PAUL JORDAN, Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County. Case No. 98-367 SC, Division H. February 3, 1999. James M. Barton, II, Judge. Counsel: Meena M. Lopez, Timothy A. Patrick, P.A., for Plaintiff. Karen A. Barnett, Barnett and Associates, P.A., for Defendant.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
THIS CAUSE coming before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, and the Court having considered the oral and written argument of counsel, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. Defendant asserts that the pleadings establish that Plaintiff, in this case involving a claim for personal injury protection (PIP) insurance benefits, failed to join the health care provider as an indispensable party.
2. A case should not be dismissed for failure to join an indispensable party if dismissal would end the claim of the original plaintiff and the only claimed prejudice is the potential for subsequent litigation by the missing party. Phillips v. Choate, 456 So.2d 556 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).
3. Here, Plaintiff would forever lose his claim if the case is dismissed. By Plaintiff’s logic, all cases, including personal injury lawsuits, would be subject to dismissal where past, unpaid medical bills are an element of damage. Such a result is neither logical nor legally required.
4. The Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings be and the same is hereby DENIED.
* * *
