JOSE GUADALUPE LARA AND STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, APPELLANTS/CROSS-APPELLEES,
v.
NATHAN LEON GOFF, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
Florida appellate court affirmed denial of new trial but reversed the set-off of unused PIP and medical benefits against future medical damages, holding that only benefits already paid and those due and owing at judgment should reduce the award.
Unused personal injury protection and medical payment benefits should not be automatically set off against jury verdicts for future medical expenses; only benefits already paid and those due and owing at judgment entry should reduce the award.
[1] Unused personal injury protection and medical payment benefits should not be automatically set off against jury verdicts for future medical expenses; only benefits alread…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“unused PIP and medical benefits should not be automatically set-off against jury verdicts; the verdict should only be reduced by the amount of benefits already paid and unused benefits due and owing on the date the judgment is entered”
Court citing Rollins v. Pizzarelli, 761 So. 2d 294, 301 (Fla.2000) for the proper standard for set-off of insurance benefits.
Nathan L. Goff recovered a jury verdict of $27,326.32 in future medical expenses in a personal injury action against State Farm. State Farm sought to …
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 PIP cases and more on FLexlaw
STRINGER, Judge.
State Farm appeals an order denying its motion for new trial and the final judgment of $64,294.97 entered in favor of Nathan L. Goff in this personal injury action. The jury awarded Mr. Goff $27,326.32 in future medical expenses, and he cross-appeals the set-off from that award of $23,424.52, which represents his unused personal injury protection (PIP) and medical payment benefits. We affirm the denial of State Farm’s motion for new trial without discussion but reverse that portion of the final judgment providing for set-off of future PIP and medical benefits. See, e.g., Allstate Ins. Co. v. Rudnick, 761 So. 2d 289, 293 (Fla.2000); Rollins v. Pizzarelli, 761 So. 2d 294, 301 (Fla.2000) (holding that unused PIP and medical benefits should not be automatically set-off against jury verdicts; the verdict should only be reduced by the amount of benefits already paid and unused benefits due and owing on the date the judgment is entered). On remand, the court must determine the amount of unused benefits due and owing to Mr. Goffs medical providers at the time the final judgment is entered and reduce the award accordingly.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with instructions.
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and SCHEB, JOHN M., (Senior) Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Rollins v. Pizzarelli, 761 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 2000)
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Bonita H. Rudnick, 761 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 2000)