Volume 16

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 925a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1610WILL

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Assignment which hinted at intent to convey right to sue while suggesting that it was not intended to convey anything but promise to cooperate and reimburse legal expenses incurred in obtaining payment from insurer and which expressed that it is not assignment of cause of action while authorizing medical provider to prosecute action was ambiguous at best and, at worst, withholds standing — Error to enter judgment in favor of provider

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1198a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1612SILV

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Validity — There is no requirement that assignee sign assignment — Lack of consideration for assignment is defense that can be raised by parties to assignment, not by insurer — Demand letter — Where presuit demand letter and all pleadings clearly indicate that provider submitted demand letter and has brought action in its name, doing business under two registered fictitious names, and insurer’s adjuster acknowledged that both names are provider’s DBAs, demand letter is substantially compliant with PIP statute — Examination under oath — Failure to attend — Insurer waived right to deny benefits based on failure to attend EUO that insurer voluntarily cancelled and rescheduled — Moreover, insured had no duty to attend EUOs scheduled to be conducted after insurer had withdrawn benefits based on independent medical examination

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 333c

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 164WELLN

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment is valid despite language providing that insured remains completely responsible to pay for all medical treatment

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 690b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 167SULLI

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Insured did not have standing to file suit for PIP benefits where insured signed unqualified assignment of benefits to medical provider and did not revoke assignment prior to filing suit

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 977a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1610FRAN

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Insured who had assigned PIP benefits to medical providers prior to filing complaint against insurer for recovery of benefits did not have standing to file suit — Lack of standing at inception of suit was not cured by revocation of assignments after suit was filed

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 256b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 163RUSZK

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Corporation solely owned by medical provider had standing to bring PIP suit despite fact that corporation did not provide medical treatment or submit bills to insurer where corporation was assignee of insured

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 786a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 168FORST

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Where language of assignment permitted payment of any outstanding amounts to medical provider by insured’s attorney, purpose of assignment was satisfied and assignment was extinguished when provider accepted payment from attorney for outstanding account balance, and provider no longer had standing to maintain suit against insurer

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 959bOnline Reference: FLWSUPP 1610YOLA

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Insurer’s motion for summary judgment based on lack of standing is denied where factual issue exists as to whether document that indicates in three places that it is assignment of benefits was intended as assignment — Further, insurer lacks standing to challenge assignment — Equitable assignment may be formed where medical provider finished treatment and filed suit based on assignment, and insured signed assignment and never challenged its validity

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 339b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 164AROCH

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Document that uses words “assignment of benefits” in title and body, but which expressly refers to direct payment provision of PIP statute and does not expressly transfer cause of action, is qualified assignment that transferred only right to receive payment from insurer — Provider does not have standing to pursue suit — Insurer’s motion for summary judgment granted

16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 13a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Bill collection agency — Trial court that dismissed bill collection agency’s suit for PIP benefits was correct to extent it determined that agency lacked standing to seek statutory recovery of PIP benefits because it is not healthcare provider listed in PIP statute — However, trial court erred in dismissing agency’s suit because breach of contract claim by agency based on assignment from medical provider through common law to recover after-loss contractual PIP benefits is not prohibited by PIP statute