UNITED AUTOMOBILE
v.
COUNTY LINE CHIROPRATIC CENTER VICENTE DELGADO
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.
United Auto Insurance Company appeals a summary judgment entered in favor of County Line Chiropractic Center on issues of medical bill reasonableness, treatment relatedness, and medical necessity. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding UAIC's conflicting expert affidavit and that summary judgment was therefore improper.
The trial court abused its discretion by excluding UAIC's conflicting affidavit. When UAIC's excluded affidavit is considered, summary judgment was error and should not have been granted. The case presents genuine factual disputes that preclude summary judgment on reasonableness, relatedness, and medical necessity.
[1] Excluding a conflicting affidavit on the reasonableness, relatedness, and medical necessity of services constitutes an abuse of discretion.
[2] Summary judgment is improper when a conflicting affidavit, if considered, would create a genuine issue of material fact.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“it was an abuse of discretion to exclude UAIC's conflicting affidavit on whether the medical bills at issue were reasonable in price, the medical treatment was related to the accident, and the prescribed diagnostic testing, treatment, and services were medically necessary”
Establishes the core holding that exclusion of the conflicting expert affidavit constituted reversible error
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceUAIC brought a case against County Line Chiropractic Center regarding medical bills for chiropractic services. The trial court granted the Provider's …
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.
Before: TRAWICK, WALSH, and GINA BEOVIDES, JJ
PER CURIAM.
Filing # 111615938 E-Filed 08/11/2020 03:08:54 PM [*2] [*2] United Auto Insurance Company (“UAIC”) appeals the trial court’s order granting final summary judgment on behalf of County Line Chiropractic Center, Inc. (“Provider”). Here, the trial court rejected the conflicting affidavit offered by UAIC of Dr. Don Morris, and summary judgment was granted on the Provider’s Motion for Summary Judgment regarding Reasonableness, Relatedness and Medical Necessity. As this panel and the majority of prior panels from this Court have found, it was an abuse of discretion to exclude UAIC’s conflicting affidavit on whether the medical bills at issue were reasonable in price, the medical treatment was related to the accident, and the prescribed diagnostic testing, treatment, and services were medically necessary. Taking UAIC’s excluded affidavit into account, it was error to grant summary judgment. See United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Miami-Dade MRI a/a/o Bermudez, 2018-164 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. June 3, 2020); State Farm Mutual Ins. Co. v. Gables Insurance Recovery a/a/o Yuderis Rego, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 860a (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. Nov. 20, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co. v. Open MRI of Miami Dade, Ltd. a/a/o Rosa Castillo, Case No. 2017-326-AP-01 (Fla. 11th Cir Ct. Nov. 6, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Miami Dade County MRI, Corp. a/a/o Marta Figueredo, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 506b (Fla. 11th Cir. App. July 30, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Miami Dade County MRI, Corp. a/a/o Javier Rodriguez, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. [*3] [*3] 225c (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. July 25, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Miami Dade County MRI, Corp. a/a/o Rene Dechard, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 226a (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct., August 12, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Millennium Radiology, LLC a/a/o Javier Rodriguez, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 911b (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. July 19, 2019).
Accordingly, the summary judgment and final judgment entered below are hereby REVERSED, and this cause is REMANDED to the trial court.
Appellee’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is DENIED. Appellant’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is conditionally GRANTED (conditioned upon Appellant ultimately prevailing and the enforceability of the proposal for settlement) and REMANDED to the trial court to fix amount.
COPIES FURNISHED TO COUNSEL
OF RECORD AND TO ANY PARTY
NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL
[*4] Copies Furnished to: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]