Volume 20

Case Search

ADVANCED MRI DIAGNOSTIC A/A/O ANTHONY MAYO, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 599a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2006MAYOInsurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — There is no legal distinction between direction to pay and assignment of benefits — Document that “assigns benefits of insurance” confers standing on medical provider — Provider is real party in interest — Insurer has no standing to challenge assignment

Read More »

ADVANCED MRI DIAGNOSTIC A/A/O ANTHONY MAYO, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 521b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2005MAYOInsurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — There is no legal distinction between direction to pay and assignment of benefits — Document that “assigns benefits of insurance” confers standing on medical provider — Provider is real party in interest — Insurer has no standing to challenge assignment

Read More »

ADVANCED MRI DIAGNOSTICS a/a/o BENITA CIMENT, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INS. CO., Defendant.

20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 422a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2004CIMEInsurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Validity — Document entitled “Assignment of Benefits” which contains instruction to pay PIP benefits to medical provider is valid assignment conferring standing on provider — There is no legal distinction between assignment of benefits and direction to pay — Medical provider is real party in interest — Insurer has no standing to challenge assignment of benefits

Read More »

RAPID REHABILITATION, INC., a Florida Corporation (assignee of Forbes, Cyrus), Plaintiff/Appellant, v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Florida Corporation, Defendant/Appellee.

20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 649a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2007FORBInsurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Document that assigns benefits of insurance to medical provider for services rendered to insured and covered by PIP coverage “and in accordance with section 627.736(5)” creates valid assignment — Second clause stating that there has been compliance with statute does not alter first clause creating assignment — Where provider was not in compliance with fictitious name statute at time action was filed but subsequently came into compliance, noncompliance was cured, and provider could maintain suit from that point forward

Read More »

UNITED AUTO INSURANCE CO., Appellant, v. LAUDERDALE PHYSICIANS ASSOCIATION, Appellee.

20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 115b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2002LAUDInsurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Error to enter summary judgment in favor of medical provider where provider did not present competent evidence of existence of assignment that provider claims to have sent to insurer, but insurer denied receiving — Genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether proper assignment of benefits occurred

Read More »
Skip to content