ENVISION PHYSICAL THERAPY, INC., A/A/O CROMWELL HARRIS
v.
GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
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.
Once PIP benefits are exhausted through payment of valid claims, an insurer has no further liability on pending claims unless the insurer engaged in bad faith in handling the claims.
[1] An insurer has no further liability on pending claims once Personal Injury Protection (PIP) benefits are exhausted through the payment of valid claims, absent bad faith i…
[2] Improper payments to another provider do not constitute bad faith sufficient to overcome an insurer's exhaustion of benefits defense to a provider suing for payment after…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEnvision Physical Therapy sought PIP benefits from GEICO for services provided to Cromwell Harris. GEICO's PIP benefits were exhausted through payment…
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.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Less Inst. Physicians, 344 So. 3d 557, 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (“Because PIP benefits were exhausted through payment of valid claims and because Less neither pled bad faith, nor did the trial court make a bad faith determination, USAA has no further liability on pending claims.”); GEICO Indem. Co. v. Gables Ins. Recovery, Inc., 159 So. 3d 151, 155 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) (“Coral Imaging only applies where the PIP insurer exhausts benefits by improperly paying untimely claims.”); Northwoods Sports Med. & Physical Rehab., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 137 So. 3d 1049, 1057 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (“Once the PIP benefits are exhausted through the payment of valid claims, an insurer has no further liability on unresolved, pending claims, absent bad faith in the handling of the claim by the insurance company.”); Progressive Select Ins.
Co. v. Dr. Rahat Faderani, DO, MPH, P.A., 330 So. 3d 928, 931 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (“Were we to write on a clean slate, and except for untimely payments, we would hold that an insurance company's ‘improper’ payments to another provider do not constitute bad faith sufficient to overcome the insurance company's exhaustion of benefits defense to a provider who sues for payment after the policy limits have been exhausted.”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Envision Physical Therapy, Inc. v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., 344 So. 3d 557 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)…lant. Rivkin Radler, LLP, and Kristen L. Wenger, Drew Krieger, and Salvatore T. Coppolino (Jacksonville), for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, GORDO and LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Less Inst. Physicians, 344 So. 3d 557, 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (“Because PIP benefits were exhausted through payment of valid claims and because Less neither pled bad faith, nor did the trial court make a bad faith determination, USAA has no further liability on pending claims.”); GEI…1 / 2
-
Demase v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)…sufficient. The trial court granted the motion and entered final judgment for State Farm, and this appeal ensued. STANDARD OF REVIEW This court reviews de novo an order on a motion for summary judgment. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n v. Less Inst., 344 So. 3d 557, 559 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022). ANALYSIS This appeal presents the issue of whether the Demases’ CRN satisfied the requirements of section 624.155, Florida Statutes (2014), which permits civil actions against an insurer under certain circumstances, com…
Authorities Cited
- Northwoods Sports Med. & Physical Rehab., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. & USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 137 So. 3d 1049 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
- GEICO Indem. Co. v. Gables Ins. Recovery, Inc., 159 So. 3d 151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)
- Envision Physical Therapy, Inc. v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., 344 So. 3d 557 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)