Victory For Medical Providers In The 4th District Court Of Appeals Allstate Cases

Today we experienced a historic moment in Florida Personal Injury Protection law. The 4th District Court of Appeals (4th DCA) ruled in favor of Medical Providers across the State of Florida.   Allstate has lost the year-long battle at the District Court of Appeal level.  Your clinic may be entitled to hundreds upon thousands of dollars due to Allstate’s improper reimbursements if Allstate reimbursed you pursuant to the Medicare Fee Schedule or the Workers Compensation Fee Schedule in connection with PIP medical treatment you/your facility provided.  Please see below for a review of the 4th DCA’s decision.

Please do not hesitate to call our office to discuss this monumental decision at (561) 623-3681.

Our Advice:

SEND US ANY ALLSTATE file or bill you may have in your office. We are filing Motions and gearing up to proceed with resolving all outstanding Allstate suits. DO NOT WORRY,  you are not late!

If you would like us to submit your Allstate PIP Suits/Files/Bills, please contact Liliana Davidson, Business Development and Client Relations Manager at (561) 623-3681.  We are here to help.

The following is a summary of the issue:

What was at issue?

Thirty-two consolidated PIP cases were brought by medical providers against Allstate Insurance Company.  The main issue in the appellate case was whether or not Allstate Insurance Company’s PIP policy was legally sufficient to authorize Allstate to apply the fee schedule reimbursement limitations set forth in Section 627.736(5)(a)(2).  Florida Statutes Section 627.736(5)(a)(2) contains all of the fee schedules (i.e. Medicare, Workers’ Compensation, etc.) that an insurer may elect to utilize.  In other words, did Allstate’s insurance policy clearly and unambiguously elect to pay via the various fee schedules?

Allstate had two reimbursement choices:

1) Allstate could have elected to pay pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 627.736(5)(a)(1).   Section(5)(a)(1) contains different factors to consider in determining a reasonable reimbursement.

2)  In 2008, the statute added an additional method of calculating reasonableness. (5)(a)(2) allows insurers to limit reimbursement to 80% of maximum charges, many of them connected to the Medicare Fee Schedules. However, the latter amendment requires both a clear and unambiguous election of the various fee schedules.

(5)(a)(1) is a reasonableness inquiry while (5)(a)(2) is permissive and offers insurers a choice in limiting reimbursements based on the Medicare fee schedules.

Arguments by the Medical Providers:

The Medical Providers argued the language contained in the below endorsement is ambiguous.  They further argued that the “subject to” provision did not make a clear election of any reimbursement method.  Furthermore, the word “shall” did not make it clear whether the fee schedule method was chosen.

Arguments by Allstate:

Allstate argued the word “shall” constituted election of the fee schedule method of reimbursement. Allstate claimed that they clearly provided notice of their own intent to limit reimbursements in accordance with the Fee Schedules.

4TH DCA’S Opinion:

Today the 4th DCA agreed with the Medical Providers!  The words contained in Allstate’s endorsement/policy were too vague and ambiguous. The word “shall” generally references the PIP statute as a whole and fails to mention any application of a specific reimbursement method. The word “shall” did not add clarity to whether or not Allstate chose to utilize the fee schedule payment method or whether it’s merely acknowledging it may do so.

Lastly, dozens of courts throughout Florida are divided as to whether or not Allstate’s policy language is legally sufficient. “If Judges, learned in the law, can reach so diametrically conflicting conclusions as to what the language of the policy means, it is hard to see how it can be held as a matter of law that the language was so unambiguous that a layman would be bound by it.” State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Deni Associates of Florida, Inc., 678 So. 2d 397, 408 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

RELEVANT ALLSTATE POLICY SECTIONS

Allstate’s policy provided the following information regarding PIP benefits:

Allstate will pay to or on behalf of the injured person the following benefits:

  1. Medical Expenses

Eighty percent of all reasonable expenses for medically necessary medical, surgical, X-Ray, Dental, and rehabilitative services, including prosthetic devices, and medically necessary ambulance, hospital, and nursing services.

  An endorsement to the policy provides the following:

Limits of Liability

Any amounts payable under this coverage shall be subject to any and all limitations, authorized by section 627.736, or any other provisions of the Florida Motor Vehicle No-Fault law… including but not limited to, all fee schedules. (Emphasis Added).

See the Case here!

It’s easy to get started

Fill out the form or call us at 561-888-8888

Meet your legal team

We fight to win you more

It’s Easy to Get Started

Fill out the form or call us at 561-888-8888

Meet your legal team

We fight to win you more

Premises liability

PREMISE LIABILITY

$450,000

James was searching for equipment for painting at Home Depot. In the aisle next to him, there was a worker on a lift stocking the highest shelf. The worker pushed boxes so far across the shelf that they fell off the other edge and hit James in the head. The force almost knocked James unconscious. He sat down and the loud bang got the worker off the ladder to see what fell. When they saw James they offered him a bucket and made a report. James did not recall leaving the store or how he got home. He did not recall much except being at home depot and getting hit in the head. Home Depot told him that it was a small box of dust masks that hurt him. We discovered it was actually a large box of emergency kits that fell off the shelf.

Personal injury

PERSONAL INJURY

$850,000

In this case, our client slipped and fell on water that had accumulated near the hot tubs/showers on the Lido deck of a major cruise line ship. The client suffered torn ligaments to her shoulder that required 2 arthroscopic surgeries. The cruise line took the position that the condition on the floor was open and obvious.

Premises liability

PREMISES LIABILITY

$980,000

Georgia was visiting a friend in the hospital when she walked out of the elevator and into her friend’s room. As soon as she entered the room she slipped on a newly mopped floor without any wet floor sign present. The floor was so wet that Georgia’s entire outfit was soaked. Because of the muted tile floor, the water was invisible. Georgia needed a back operation which was unsuccessful and caused her to slip into a coma. She luckily survived.

Motor vehicle accident

MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT

$1.1 MILLION

AUTOMOBILE REAR END COLLISION

Rodrigo was driving his work truck home when he was rear-ended at a stoplight. Rodrigo needed a fusion of his thoracic spine. A terrible and complex operation. Unfortunately, while Rodrigo was undergoing the spinal operation, one of his children died and he was unable to be with his grieving wife. It was a tragic case that eventually settled.

Bicycle vs car accident

BICYCLE VS CAR ACCIDENT

$1.45 MILLION

David was a teacher at a local high school. He rode his bike to school in the morning and after school would ride another 10 miles for exercise. On a sunny afternoon on his way home an older driver turned right into him as he was riding down the street. He hurt his shoulder and neck and needed two operations. Defendant felt his injury was due to playing football 10 years earlier and would not provide him a fair or reasonable offer.

Car vs commercial truck accident

CAR VS COMMERCIAL TRUCK ACCIDENT

$3.4 MILLION

Joe was driving his 18 wheeler on the Florida Turnpike headed south after a long-haul run.  He was “bobtailing” which means he did not have a cargo trailer on the back of his truck rig.  A drunk driver lost control of his car causing Joe to avoid the accident but drive off the highway and into a canal.  He was injured in the accident but also witnessed a child die when he climbed out of the truck and came to the accident site.  There the injured child was trapped under the car and he was powerless to save the child before it passed.

Auto accident T-Bone

AUTO ACCIDENT T-BONE

$4.5 MILLION

Xao, a Vietnamese immigrant was driving home after work at night to see his pregnant wife. He stopped at a 4-way intersection and looked both ways. He did not see anyone in either direction. As Mr. X when through the intersection he was hit on the passenger side door by a mid-sized black SUV driving without their lights on. Mr. X was catastrophically injured.

Personal injury

PERSONAL INJURY

$8.2 MILLION

This was a hard-fought pedestrian accident case, in which our client was struck by an SUV driven by a teen driver, as they attempted to cross North Military Trail in West Palm Beach, FL. As a result of the accident, our client suffered numerous fractures, partial loss of vision and frontal lobe brain injury that affected his speech, and other personal injuries that required him to be hospitalized for 58 days.

At the time of the accident, our client was a cashier at Walmart and has been unable to return to work.

“This case is the epitome of what we consider part of our Core Culture and broad vision – which is to be Warriors for Justice,” stated Brian LaBovick. “Mr. Jacobus has serious permanent injuries and will continue to fight to regain his life into the foreseeable future. This verdict will allow him to get the professional help he needs to safely navigate the rest of his life.”

Medical malpractice

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

$15 MILLION

Brain damages child due to medical negligence.  Mother was misdiagnosed upon entry to the hospital while under contractions.  The child was born severely disabled.