fbpx

Volume 11

Case Search

APEX PAIN MANAGEMENT CENTER, (As Assignee of Tangalar Baldwin), Plaintiff, v. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 49a

Insurance — Defendant’s motion to dismiss granted based on finding that general allegations of material facts contained in complaint are inconsistent with facts revealed by exhibit attached to complaint — Patient’s signature contained within purported assignment of benefits attached as exhibit to complaint appears to be signature other than that of assignor named in complaint, and is same signature contained in portion of form where medical provider would proceed to accept assignment — Complaint dismissed without prejudice

Read More »

APEX PAIN MANAGEMENT CENTER, (As Assignee of Cepheon Baldwin), Plaintiff, v. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 44c

Insurance — Defendant’s motion to dismiss granted based on finding that general allegations of material facts contained in complaint are inconsistent with facts revealed by exhibit attached to complaint — Patient’s signature contained within purported assignment of benefits attached as exhibit to complaint appears to be signature other than that of assignor named in complaint and is same signature contained in portion of form where medical provider would proceed to accept assignment — Complaint dismissed without prejudice

Read More »

GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, vs. ANNE CONKLIN, Respondent.

11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 424a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Res judicata — Trial court’s order requiring insurer to produce for in camera inspection mailing list containing 274,000 entries which was utilized in class action suit did not conform to essential requirements of law, may irreparably cause material injury to insurer throughout subsequent proceedings, and is quashed based on finding that underlying claim is barred by res judicata — Instant claim was barred by class action settlement, which contained a no opt-out provision — Doctrine of res judicata applies even if plaintiff did not, as she contended, receive notice

Read More »

PERFORMANCE HEALTH & WELLNESS (Glener, David), Plaintiff, v. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 660b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Production of documents — Privilege — Trade secret — Source/statistical data owned by third party is discoverable and not privileged and court has no basis to conduct in camera inspection or take protective measures that third party’s interests may require where third party has not entered appearance to claim privilege, and insurer that is not agent or employee of third party cannot claim trade secret privilege on third party’s behalf — To extent insurer reasonably expects its witnesses to rely on data to testify regarding reasonableness of charges submitted by provider, insurer is ordered to make data available before or at depositions unless third party first enters appearance to request in camera inspection and protective measures

Read More »

MEDPEND, INC., as assignee of ADRIAN SMITH, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 363b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Production of documents — Privilege — Trade secret — Objections to production of invoices indicating price charged to medical provider for electrotherapy device and related supplies provided to insured and name and address of supplier are overruled — Provider is instructed to discuss feasability of producing copy of manual typically provided with supplies

Read More »

SHADOWOOD CHIROPRACTIC CENTER INCORPORATED (Leonice McGarvey), Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 574a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Production of documents — Privilege — Trade secret — Source/statistical data owned by third party is discoverable and not privileged and court has no basis to conduct in camera inspection or take protective measures that third party’s interests may require where third party has not entered appearance to claim privilege, and insurer that is not agent or employee of third party cannot claim trade secret privilege on third party’s behalf — To extent insurer reasonably expects its witnesses to rely on data to testify regarding reasonableness of charges submitted by provider, insurer is ordered to make data available before or at depositions unless third party first enters appearance to request in camera inspection and protective measures

Read More »
Skip to content