fbpx

Volume 21

Case Search

AVENTURA WELLNESS & REHAB CENTER, INC., AS ASSIGNEE OF CARLOS SANCHEZ, Plaintiff(s), vs. ALLSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1056a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2110SANCInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Divergent judicial opinions from county and circuit courts as to whether policy provision at issue clearly elects to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule render policy provision ambiguous per se — Florida Supreme Court’s opinion in Virtual Imaging does not compel finding that policy provision at issue unambiguously elects use of statutory fee schedule — Sufficiency of policy language was never considered in Virtual Imaging opinion, and policy provision at issue here is much broader and open to wider construction than policy language in Virtual Imaging — Policy provision that makes vague references to “any and all limitations…including, but not limited to, all fee schedules” does not unambiguously elect to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule

Read More »

EXECUTIVE DIAGNOSTIC CENTER, INC., a/a/o TIFFANY VAZQUEZ, Plaintiff, vs. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Defendant.

21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1053b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2110VAZQInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Policy that clearly subjects all payments to any limitations of PIP statute, including all fee schedules, unambiguously elects to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule — Failure to reference Medicare and inclusion of language regarding payment of reasonable charges does not render policy ambiguous

Read More »

AVENTURA WELLNESS & REHAB CENTER, INC., AS ASSIGNEE OF AMER RASHID, Plaintiff(s), vs. ALLSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant

21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 971a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2109RASHInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Divergent judicial opinions from county and circuit courts as to whether policy provision at issue clearly elects to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule render policy provision ambiguous per se — Florida Supreme Court’s opinion in Virtual Imaging does not compel finding that policy provision at issue unambiguously elects use of statutory fee schedule — Sufficiency of policy language was never considered in Virtual Imaging opinion, and policy provision at issue here is much broader and open to wider construction than policy language in Virtual Imaging — Policy provision that makes vague references to “any and all limitations…including, but not limited to, all fee schedules” does not unambiguously elect to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule

Read More »

GABLES MR(A), A/A/O ARTURO MESA, Plaintiffs, vs. ALLSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 968a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2109MESAInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Divergent judicial opinions from county and circuit courts as to whether policy provision at issue clearly elects to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule render policy provision ambiguous per se — Florida Supreme Court’s opinion in Virtual Imaging does not compel finding that policy provision at issue unambiguously elects use of statutory fee schedule — Sufficiency of policy language was never considered in Virtual Imaging opinion, and policy provision at issue here is much broader and open to wider construction than policy language in Virtual Imaging — Policy provision that makes vague references to “any and all limitations…including, but not limited to, all fee schedules” does not unambiguously elect to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule

Read More »

GABLES MR(A), AS ASSIGNEE OF JAVIER PEREZ, Plaintiffs, vs. ALLSTATE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 964a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2109JPERInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Divergent judicial opinions from county and circuit courts as to whether policy provision at issue clearly elects to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule render policy provision ambiguous per se — Florida Supreme Court’s opinion in Virtual Imaging does not compel finding that policy provision at issue unambiguously elects use of statutory fee schedule — Sufficiency of policy language was never considered in Virtual Imaging opinion, and policy provision at issue here is much broader and open to wider construction than policy language in Virtual Imaging — Policy provision that makes vague references to “any and all limitations…including, but not limited to, all fee schedules” does not unambiguously elect to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule

Read More »

HIALEAH DIAGNOSTIC, INC., A/A/O YENIARIS PIMENTEL, Plaintiffs, vs. ALLSTATE INDEMNITY COMPANY, Defendant.

21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 961a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2109PIMEInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Divergent judicial opinions from county and circuit courts as to whether policy provision at issue clearly elects to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule render policy provision ambiguous per se — Florida Supreme Court’s opinion in Virtual Imaging does not compel finding that policy provision at issue unambiguously elects use of statutory fee schedule — Sufficiency of policy language was never considered in Virtual Imaging opinion, and policy provision at issue here is much broader and open to wider construction than policy language in Virtual Imaging — Policy provision that makes vague references to “any and all limitations…including, but not limited to, all fee schedules” does not unambiguously elect to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule

Read More »

HIALEAH DIAGNOSTIC, INC., A/A/O JUAN DUARTE, Plaintiffs vs. ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 958a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2109DUARInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Divergent judicial opinions from county and circuit courts as to whether policy provision at issue clearly elects to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule render policy provision ambiguous per se — Florida Supreme Court’s opinion in Virtual Imaging does not compel finding that policy provision at issue unambiguously elects use of statutory fee schedule — Sufficiency of policy language was never considered in Virtual Imaging opinion, and policy provision at issue here is much broader and open to wider construction than policy language in Virtual Imaging — Policy provision that makes vague references to “any and all limitations…including, but not limited to, all fee schedules” does not unambiguously elect to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule

Read More »

GABLES MR(A), A/A/O LIZ UGAZ, Plaintiffs, vs. ALLSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 955a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2109UGAZInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Divergent judicial opinions from county and circuit courts as to whether policy provision at issue clearly elects to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule render policy provision ambiguous per se — Florida Supreme Court’s opinion in Virtual Imaging does not compel finding that policy provision at issue unambiguously elects use of statutory fee schedule where sufficiency of policy language was never considered in Virtual Imaging opinion, and policy provision at issue here is much broader and open to wider construction than policy language in Virtual Imaging — Policy provision that makes vague references to “any and all limitations…including, but not limited to, all fee schedules” does not unambiguously elect to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule

Read More »

GABLES MR(A), A/A/O LISSETH M. GUERRA, Plaintiffs, vs. ALLSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 951a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2109GUERInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Divergent judicial opinions from county and circuit courts as to whether policy provision at issue clearly elects to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule render policy provision ambiguous per se — Florida Supreme Court’s opinion in Virtual Imaging does not compel finding that policy provision at issue unambiguously elects use of statutory fee schedule — Sufficiency of policy language was never considered in Virtual Imaging opinion, and policy provision at issue here is much broader and open to wider construction than policy language in Virtual Imaging — Policy provision that makes vague references to “any and all limitations…including, but not limited to, all fee schedules” does not unambiguously elect to limit reimbursement to permissive statutory fee schedule

Read More »
Skip to content