Case Search

Please select a category.

ADVANCED INJURY MEDICAL REHAB CENTER, L.L.C., Plaintiff, vs. METROPOLITAN PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

9 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 321a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Dispute between medical provider and insurer — Standing — Assignment — Where insurance policy provides that no change of interest in policy is effective unless insurer consents in writing by means of endorsement to the policy, insured was prohibited from assigning rights under policy absent endorsement — Summary judgment entered against medical provider — Medical provider to have 30 days within which to file suit on behalf of insured

ADVANCED INJURY MEDICAL REHAB CENTER, L.L.C., Plaintiff, vs. METROPOLITAN PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 5th Judicial Circuit in and for Hernando County, Civil Division. Case No. H-27-CC-2001-000308. March 4, 2002. Peyton B. Hyslop, Judge. Counsel: Ralph M. Vitola, Brooksville. Marc B. Nussbaum, Reynolds & Stowell, P.A., St. Petersburg.

ORDER

THIS CAUSE having come on for hearing on Defendant’s Motion For Summary Judgment and Motion To Strike Plaintiff’s Claim For Attorney’s Fees And Costs, on February 7, 2002, and the Court being fully advised in the premises, it is hereby,

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Motion For Summary Judgment is Granted. The court, after reviewing the pleadings, Affidavits, relevant insurance policy, and the case of Lexington Insurance Company v. Simkins Industries, Inc., 704 So.2d 1384 (Sup. Ct. 1998), finds that the language contained within the insurance policy stating “[n]o change of interest in this policy is effective unless we [the insurer] consents in writing by means of endorsement to this policy…” prohibits the insured injured passenger from assigning her rights under the automobile policy issued by Defendant, absent the consent of Defendant by written endorsement to the policy. The court further finds that the attempted assignment occurred prior to any loss being sustained, as it relates to a breach of contract claim for overdue PIP benefits.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff has have thirty (30) days from the date of hearing within which to file suit on behalf of the insured. The court finds that Plaintiff shall have no claim for attorney’s fees or costs incurred in pursuing the subject lawsuit.

* * *

Skip to content