25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 285a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2503GRASInsurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical expenses — Statutory fee schedules — Clear and unambiguous election by insurer — PIP policy and endorsement do not clearly and unambiguously elect use of permissive statutory fee schedules
PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL BUILDING GROUP, INC. a/a/o Luisa R. Grasset, Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, General Jurisdiction Division. Case No. 2013-16300-SP-25-04. May 4, 2017. Carlos M. Guzman, Judge. Counsel: Walter A. Arguelles, Arguelles Legal, P.L., Miami, for Plaintiff. Blake Partridge, Kirwan Spellacy & Danner, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Defendant.
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARYJUDGMENT AS TO THE APPLICATION OF THEMEDICARE PART B FEE SCHEDULE ANDWORKER’S COMPENSATION FEE LIMITATIONDIRECTED TO DEFENDANT
THIS CAUSE, having come before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to the Application of the Medicare Part B and Worker’s Compensation Fee Schedules on May 4, 2017, and the Court after having heard argument of counsel and being otherwise advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to the Application of the Medicare Part B and Worker’s Compensation Fee Schedules is hereby GRANTED.
2. The Court finds as a matter of law that the Defendant’s policy form 9810.7 and amendatory endorsement 6910.3 does not clearly and unambiguously incorporate the schedule of maximum charges as permitted by Fla. Stat. § 627.736.
3. The issues of reasonableness, relatedness and medical necessity remain at issue.