Volume 22

22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 397a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2203WESTInsurance — Personal injury protection — Accord and satisfaction — Insurer not entitled to summary judgment on affirmative defense of accord and satisfaction — Provider’s negotiation of checks which were marked for full and final payment of PIP benefits and for full and final payment of PIP interest did not, as matter of law, result in accord and satisfaction — Record did not reveal the existence of a preexisting dispute between the parties, and there was nothing in the language of the checks, the explanation of benefits sent to provider, or the explanation of review which reasonably implied that provider, by accepting checks, would be deemed to have agreed with insurer’s position — Conflicting affidavits submitted by parties create genuine issue of material fact as to parties’ intent — Statutory accord and satisfaction — Language “FOR FULL AND FINAL PAYMENT,” placed within body of “Pay to the Order” line of checks, did not meet statutory definition of conspicuous

22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 951a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2208KALTInsurance — Affirmative defenses — Accord and satisfaction — Summary judgment — Factual issues

22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 162a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2201BAILInsurance — Personal injury protection — Affirmative defenses — Accord and satisfaction — No accord and satisfaction occurred when medical provider cashed check for reduced amount with notation that it was for full and final payment of PIP benefits where insurer knew prior to sending check that provider had assignment of benefits expressly requiring that any reduced payment, irrespective of accompanying language, would be cashed under protest and would not be accord and satisfaction — Further, there was no accord and satisfaction where there was no dispute between insurer and provider regarding amount of benefits payable prior to insurer’s payment of reduced amount, and “full and final” language on check was neither clear nor conspicuous

22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 738a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2206IGLEInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Standing — Plaintiff who received assignment from provider has standing to bring action against insurer — Exhaustion of policy limits — Where insurer received plaintiff’s demand letter and copies of assignments from insured to provider and from provider to plaintiff before paying remaining benefits to provider, payment to provider was gratuitous and did not exhaust benefits — Payment to provider did not effect accord and satisfaction as to debt owed by insurer to plaintiff