ALLSTATE INS.
v.
FLA. HOSP.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Allstate Insurance appeals a trial court's entry of summary judgment in favor of Florida Hospital regarding insurance reimbursement rates. The appellate court reversed, finding that controlling First District precedent established that Allstate's policy language provided sufficient notice of the election to apply fee schedules.
Summary judgment in favor of Allstate is warranted as a matter of law. The First District Court of Appeal's controlling decision in Allstate Fire and Casualty Insurance v. Stand-Up MRI of Tallahassee, P.A. (issued after the trial court's order) established that Allstate's policy language provided sufficient notice of the election to apply the fee schedule.
[1] An appellate court may reverse a trial court's summary judgment order when a controlling, recent appellate decision clarifies the law after the trial court's ruling.
[2] Insurance policy language can provide sufficient notice of an election to apply a statutory fee schedule for medical services.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The very recent decision in Allstate Fire and Casualty Ins. v. Stand-Up MRI of Tallahassee, P.A., 40 Fla. L. Weekly D693b (Fla. 1st DCA March 18, 2015) is controlling as the First District Court of Appeal reviewed Allstate's policy language (the same policy language that is the subject of the instant appeal) and found that the policy language provided sufficient notice of the election to apply the fee schedule.”
Establishes the controlling precedent that forms the basis for the reversal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceElizabeth Jaramillo held an Allstate insurance policy. Florida Hospital, as assignee of the insured, sought reimbursement for medical services. The tr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Controlling Precedent cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant,
V.
FLORIDA HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER, a/a/o assignee of Elizabeth Jaramillo, Appellee.
CASE NO.: 2014-CV-000029-A-O Lower Case No.: 2013-SC-000287-0
Appeal from the County Court, for Orange County, Florida, Andrew L. Cameron, County Judge.
Anthony J. Parrino, Esquire and Peter J. Valeta, Esquire, for Appellant.
Dean Mitchell, Esquire and Thomas Andrew Player, Esquire, for Appellee.
Before DOHERTY, SCHREIBER, and LATIMORE, J.J.
PER CURIAM.
FINAL ORDER REVERSING TRIAL COURT
Appellant, Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”) timely appeals the trial court's “Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Granting Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment and Entering Final Judgement [sic] for Plaintiff” (“Final Judgment”) entered March 28, 2014 in favor of Appellee, Florida Hospital Medical Center (“Florida Hospital”) as assignee of the insured, Elizabeth Jaramillo (“Jaramillo”). This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to section 26.012(1), Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(c)(1)(A). We dispense with oral argument. Fla. R. App. P. 9.320.
The very recent decision in Allstate Fire and Casualty Ins. v. Stand-Up MRI of Tallahassee, P.A., 40 Fla. L. Weekly D693b (Fla. 1st DCA March 18, 2015) is controlling as the First District Court of Appeal reviewed Allstate's policy language (the same policy language that is the subject of the instant appeal) and found that the policy language provided sufficient notice of the election to apply the fee schedule.¹ This Court also notes that the trial court in the instant case did not have the benefit of the First District's opinion which was issued after the trial court entered the Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Entering Final Judgment for Plaintiff. Accordingly, as a matter of law, summary judgment in favor of Allstate is warranted in this case and the trial court's Final Judgment in favor of Florida Hospital must be reversed.
Based on the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. The trial court's “Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and Entering Final Judgement [sic] for Plaintiff" entered March 28, 2014 is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
2. Allstate's Motion for Attorney's Fees filed October 24, 2014 is GRANTED contingent upon the trial court determining that Allstate is entitled to attorney's fees pursuant to the Proposal for Settlement and the assessment of those fees is REMANDED to the trial court. Also, Allstate is entitled to have costs taxed in its favor by filing a proper motion with the trial court pursuant to 9.400(a), Fla. R. App. P. ¹ In South Florida Wellness, Inc. v. Allstate Insurance Co., Case No. 13-61759-CIV-DIMITROULEAS (United States District Court, Southern District of Florida - February 13, 2015), Judge Dimitrouleas also found that Allstate's policy language provided sufficient notice as to the election to limit reimbursement to the fee schedules in section 627.736, Florida Statutes.
3. Florida Hospital's Motion for Appellate Attorney's Fees filed October 21, 2014 is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at Orlando, Orange County, Florida, on this 15th day of April, 2015.
SCHREIBER and LATIMORE, J.J., concur. /S/ PATRICIA A. DOHERTY Presiding Circuit Judge
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Order has been furnished to: Anthony J. Parrino, Esquire, Reynolds, Parrino, Spano & Shadwick, P.A., 8700-4th Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida 33702; Peter J. Valeta, Esquire, Meckler Bulger Tilson Marick & Pearson LLP, 123 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 1800, Chicago, Illinois 60606; Dean A. Mitchell, Esquire, 4939 N.W. 115th Avenue, Ocala, Florida 34482; Thomas Andrew Player, Esquire, The Nation Law Firm, 570 Crown Oak Centre, Longwood, Florida 32750, and the Honorable Andrew L. Cameron, Orange County Judge, 425 N. Orange Avenue, Orlando, Florida 32801, on this 15th day of April, 2015.
/S/ Judicial Assistant