9 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 578a
Insurance — Med Pay — Restriction in insurance contract excluding Med Pay benefits for accidents occurring while insured is operating a vehicle owned by his employer does not violate section 627.736(4)(f) — Statute is not centered on providing additional coverage but rather serves to coordinate benefits
LUIS MUNIZ, Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INS. CO., Appellee. Circuit Court, 11th Judicial Circuit (Appellate) in and for Miami-Dade County. Case No. 00-385 AP. L.C. Case No. 99-7586 SP 25. July 16 , 2002. On appeal from final summary judgment of the County Court of Miami-Dade County, Florida, the Honorable Ellen Sue Venzer presiding. Counsel: Thomas J. Morgan, Jr. of Bernard H. Butts, Jr., P.A., for Appellant. Frances F. Guash, of Luis E. Ordoñez & Associates, for Appellee.
(Before GISELA CARDONNE ELY, EUGENE J. FIERRO AND GERALD D. HUBBART, JJ.)
OPINION
(PER CURIAM.) Appellant Luis Muniz, while driving his employer’s car, was involved in an accident. At the time of his accident, Muniz was insured with State Farm Mutual Insurance Company for personal injury protection benefits, (“PIP”), and medical payments insurance benefits (“Med-Pay”). The parties agree that State Farm was obligated to pay PIP benefits to Muniz. However, State Farm refuses to provide Med-Pay benefits because the parties’ contract specifically excludes benefits for accidents occurring while the insured is operating a car owned by his employer. There is no dispute that the contract, if allowed to stand, restricts medical payments coverage to circumstances narrower than would be allowed under PIP law. Muniz argues on appeal that such restrictions violate § 627.736(4)(f), Fla. Stat. (1999).
Section 627.736(4)(f) provides that:
Medical payments insurance, if available in a policy of motor vehicle insurance, shall pay the portion of any claim for personal injury protection medical benefits which is otherwise covered but is not payable due to the coinsurance provision of paragraph (1)(a), regardless of whether the full amount of personal injury protection coverage has been exhausted. The benefits shall not be payable for the amount of any deductible which has been selected.
Muniz contends the statute was intended to extend Med-Pay coverage to all situations where PIP benefits were provided. State Farm responds that such language only governs the timing of Med-Pay benefits, assuming that they are otherwise available.
There is no decision by the Third District Court of Appeal which directly addresses the instant matter. However, absent interdistrict conflict, this court is bound to follow precedents of the other district courts of appeal. Pardo v. State, 596 So. 2d 665, 666-67 (Fla. 1992). In fact the First and Fourth District Courts of Appeal have directly addressed this issue. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Jones, 700 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Bolden v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 689 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). As held in Allstate:
We are persuaded that the med pay provision does not apply in all situations where PIP coverage exists. Bolden is onpoint on this issue. In that case, the Fourth District concluded that there are two possible meanings of “if available,” and that med pay coverage is not required by law, thus the insurer can make it available exclusively to certain defined insureds, and not across the board to all who are insured for PIP. It is unnecessary to restate the analysis set forth in Bolden. Suffice it to say that we agree with that analysis.
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Jones, 700 So. 2d 110, 112 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).
Following Allstate and Bolden, we find that § 627.736(4)(f) was not centered on providing additional coverage to persons, but rather served to coordinate coverages. “If the Legislature intends to extend coverage to persons not otherwise covered by optional medical payment provisions in policies, it should write more specific legislation to accomplish that purpose.” Bolden v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 689 So. 2d at 343.
The decision of the County Court is AFFIRMED.
* * *
