Volume 8

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 159b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Error to enter summary judgment in favor of insured in action seeking payment of certain medical bills where jury had found in prior lawsuit that insured had unreasonably refused to attend second independent medical examination, so that factual issue existed in instant case as to whether PIP benefits had been waived — Further, insured’s prior direction to insurer not to pay the bills in question created question of fact as to whether insurer was responsible for those bills, and substantial question of fact exists as to what, if anything, is owed

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 501a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Section 627.736 does not require HCFA form to be countersigned by insured if medical provider has accepted an assignment of benefits

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 500b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Statute provides that health care provider providing treatment covered by PIP insurance may be paid directly if insured countersigns medical bills — Where insured and health care provider failed to comply with statute by failing to comply with guidelines of authorized claim form requiring signature by both insured and health care provider, insurer has not been furnished with notice of amount of a covered loss and 30-day period in which insurer must authenticate claim has not begun to run — Phrase “signature on file” typed in signature box does not satisfy statutory requirement to countersign bill or claim form

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 851a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Section 627.736 does not require HCFA form to be countersigned by insured if medical provider has accepted an assignment of benefits

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 570a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Dismissal — Assignment — Attachment of assignment of benefits by provider claiming PIP benefits pursuant to an assignment is not required by Rule 1.130 — Provider’s allegation of standing by way of assignment must be taken as true for purposes of insurer’s motion to dismiss — Motion for summary judgment based on provider’s lack of standing denied where provider’s allegation of assignment is taken as true and insurer presented no evidence supporting motion

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 637b

Insurance — Nonjoinder of insurer in action against insured — Counterclaim against insurer asserting coverage issues which are totally unrelated to any other claims in the action is dismissed

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 846b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Preferred provider rates — Insurer could not reduce benefits paid to insured’s assignee to PPO rates as it did not have a PPO policy as required by statute

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 847b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Plaintiff is not entitled to recover PIP benefits for MRI services provided to insured, where plaintiff does not perform necessary medical services and is not a “physician, hospital, clinic, or other person or institution lawfully rendering treatment to an injured person for a bodily injury covered by PIP insurance”

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 361a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Medical payments — Plaintiff, which referred and scheduled appointment for insured at MRI facility that actually performed MRI services, is not “physician, hospital, clinic, or other person or institution lawfully rendering treatment” to insured that would qualify it as a healthcare provider entitled to payment of PIP or MPC benefits under section 627.736 — Plaintiff’s activities in referring patients to MRI service and billing insurer more than 400% more than actual charge by service provider constitute clear violation of patient brokering statute and underlying public policy prohibiting patient brokering and split-fee arrangements such as that between plaintiff and MRI provider — Plaintiff not entitled to payment of PIP or MPC benefits under insured’s policy under section 627.736 because such payment would be contrary to public policy of state — Summary judgment granted in favor of insurer and jurisdiction retained to consider insurer’s counterclaim for recovery of monies previously paid to plaintiff

8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 737a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Limitation of actions — Statute of limitations did not begin to run on date insurer provided notice that it would no longer pay PIP benefits since plaintiff had no medical expenses unpaid by insurer on that date — As each new date of medical service after insurer’s notice resulted in plaintiff incurring additional expenses, another five-year limitations period commenced for that date of service — Motion for summary judgment granted as to expenses incurred on date of service more than five years prior to filing of suit and denied as to expenses incurred on dates of service less than five years prior to filing of suit