Denied February 26, 2020.
Petition for Certiorari Review of Order from the Circuit
Court for Volusia County, Randell H. Rowe, III, Judge,
Kathryn D. Weston, Judge, Michael S. Orfinger, Judge, Matthew
M. Foxman, Judge, Steven C. Henderson, Judge, Elizabeth A.
Blackburn, Judge, Karen A. Foxman, Judge, Dawn D. Nichols,
Judge, Raul A. Zambrano, Judge, Sandra C. Upchurch, Judge,
Dennis Craig, Judge, James Robert Clay, Judge.
D. Weinstein, Thomas L. Hunker, Michael A. Rosenberg of Cole,
Scott & Kissane, P.A., Plantation, and Rebecca O'Dell
Townsend, Louis Schulman, and Scott W. Dutton, of Dutton Law
Group, P.A., Tampa, for Petitioners.
K. Delegal and Tiffany A. Roddenberry, of Holland &
Knight L.L.P., Tallahassee, Amicus Curiae Brief for Personal
Insurance Federation of Florida and American Property
Casualty Insurance Association, in support of Petitioners.
Douglas H. Stein, of Douglas H. Stein, P.A., Miami, and
Brooke Boltz, of Boltz Legal, Oviedo, for Respondents.
petition for writ of certiorari in case number 5D19-1409,
Geico Indemnity Company ("Geico") seeks to quash a
decision of the circuit court sitting in its appellate
capacity. That decision affirmed a final summary judgment
entered in county court in favor of one of the Respondents
pursuant to Florida's personal injury protection
("PIP") statute. See § 627.736, Fla.
Stat. (2017). For the reasons expressed
below, we grant Geico's petition and quash the circuit
statute authorizes an insurer to limit reimbursement to a
provider for certain charges resulting from the rendering of
care and services to an insured. Specifically, the PIP
statute authorizes an insurer to limit reimbursement to 80%
of a schedule of maximum charges if it provides an
appropriate notice in its policy. See §
627.736(5)(a)1. ("subparagraph 1"); see
also § 627.736(5)(a)5. ("subparagraph
issued a PIP insurance policy to Frank Irizarry. Following an
automobile collision, Irizarry received medical care from the
Accident & Injury Clinic, A/A/O Frank Irizarry ("the
Clinic"). The Clinic sought payment from Geico for
reimbursement based on an assignment of Irizarry's
benefits under the Geico policy. The amount billed by the
Clinic was less than the maximum listed in the policy's
schedule of fees and charges. After reviewing the claim,
Geico remitted 80% of the billed amount pursuant to the
policy. Subsequently, the Clinic filed a complaint, claiming
that it was entitled to full reimbursement of the billed
amount based upon the plain language of Geico's policy,
which states as follows:
The Company will pay in accordance with the Florida Motor
Vehicle No Fault Law (as enacted, amended, or newly enacted),
and where applicable in accordance with all fee schedules
contained in the Florida Motor Vehicle No Fault Law, to or
for the benefit of the injured person:
(A) Eighty percent (80%) of medical benefits which are
medically necessary, pursuant to the following schedule of
maximum charges contained in the Florida Statutes ...