9 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 254a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attachment of copy of medical bill at issue to complaint by medical provider claiming PIP benefits is not required by rule 1.130(a)
N.T.C.A, as assignee for Jacqueline O’Brien, Plaintiff, v. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County. Case No. 01-15462-53. February 19, 2002. William Herring, Judge. Counsel: Cris E. Boyar, for Plaintiff. Fernando Rolg, for Defendant.
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE having come before this Court at the Hearing held On Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss filed on October 23, 2001, and the Court having heard argument of counsel, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is thereupon,
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that:
1. The Plaintiff medical provider filed suit against the Defendant for personal injury protection benefits due to a reduction of a medical bill. The complaint specifically stated the name of the medical provider, the date of service at issue, the amount of the bill, the amount of payment made by the Defendant, and the amount in controversy. The Plaintiff also attached an assignment of benefits.
2. The Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss alleging the complaint was defective because the Plaintiff failed to attach a copy of the medical bills at issue in violation of Rule 1.130(a) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and the complaint failed to set forth the amount of the bill.
3. The Court finds the Defendant’s argument misplaced as Rule 1.130(a) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure does not require the Plaintiff to attach a copy of the medical bill at issue because the suit has been brought based on the breach of the policy of insurance. Rule 1.130(a) specifically states that no papers shall be unnecessarily attached to the pleading and, as a result, the specific medical bills should not be attached to the complaint. See Mankowitz v. Allstate Insurance Co., 8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 570 (Sarasota Cty Court 2001); Mankowitz v. Allstate Insurance Co., 8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 648 (Sarasota Cty Court 2001) Med Plus Medical Clinic v. Progressive, 8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 502 (Fla. Sarasota Cty Court 2001); .
4. The Court further finds the complaint to be sufficiently drafted to require the Defendant to file an Answer.
5. Accordingly, the Defendant’s Motion is hereby denied.
* * *
