9 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 564a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Document stating that it is direct assignment of rights and benefits under policy is valid assignment — Insurer’s motion to dismiss denied
AMC REHAB & PAIN CENTERS, a/a/o SAMUEL MANDELL, Plaintiff, v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO., a Florida corporation, Defendant. County Court, 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County. Case No. 01-020475 (50). June 10, 2002. Peter B. Skolnik, Judge. Counsel: Cris G. Boyar, for Plaintiff. Majid Vossoughi, for Defendant.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’SMOTION TO DISMISS
This matter coming onto be heard, upon the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing and Subject Matter Jurisdiction, and the being otherwise fully advised in the premises, the Court finds as follows.
1. The Plaintiff filed suit for personal injury protection benefits. The Plaintiff attached an assignment of benefits to the complaint.
2. The Defendant’s motion to dismiss attacks the assignment of benefits alleging it is actually a direction to pay and not a valid assignment of benefits.
3. The Court finds the document to be a valid assignment of benefits because it states “THIS IS A DIRECT ASSIGNMENT OF MY RIGHTS AND BENEFITS UNDER THE POLICY.” This Court finds this language creates a valid assignment of benefits. In support thereof see Allstate Insurance Co. v. BMW Enterprises Inc., 9 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 95 (Fla. Broward Cir. Court) where the Circuit Court held “Florida has neither established formal requirements for, nor defined the specific language necessary to, constitute or create an assignment of benefits….An assignment is a transfer or setting over of property, or of some right or interest therein, from one person to another. Generally, contract rights can be assigned unless forbidden by the terms of the contract itself, or unless the assignment would violate some rule of public policy, a statute, or the contract rights involve obligations of a personal nature.” See also USAA Casualty Insurance Co. v Michael Romm, 712 So.2d 405 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) where the Court opined “It is the act by which one person transfers to another, or cause to vest in another, his right of property or interest therein.”
4. Accordingly, pursuant to the case law cited above, the Defendant’s Motion is hereby denied and the Defendant has 15 days to file an Answer to the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
* * *
