• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
MENUMENU
MENUMENU
  • Home
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • FlaglerLive Board of Directors
    • Comment Policy
    • Mission Statement
    • Our Values
    • Privacy Policy
  • Live Calendar
  • Submit Obituary
  • Submit an Event
  • Support FlaglerLive
  • Advertise on FlaglerLive (386) 503-3808
  • Search Results

FlaglerLive

No Bull, no Fluff, No Smudges

MENUMENU
  • Flagler
    • Flagler County Commission
    • Beverly Beach
    • Economic Development Council
    • Flagler History
    • Mondex/Daytona North
    • The Hammock
    • Tourist Development Council
  • Palm Coast
    • Palm Coast City Council
    • Palm Coast Crime
  • Bunnell
    • Bunnell City Commission
    • Bunnell Crime
  • Flagler Beach
    • Flagler Beach City Commission
    • Flagler Beach Crime
  • Cops/Courts
    • Circuit & County Court
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • Federal Courts
    • Flagler 911
    • Fire House
    • Flagler County Sheriff
    • Flagler Jail Bookings
    • Traffic Accidents
  • Rights & Liberties
    • Fourth Amendment
    • First Amendment
    • Privacy
    • Second Amendment
    • Seventh Amendment
    • Sixth Amendment
    • Sunshine Law
    • Third Amendment
    • Religion & Beliefs
    • Human Rights
    • Immigration
    • Labor Rights
    • 14th Amendment
    • Civil Rights
  • Schools
    • Adult Education
    • Belle Terre Elementary
    • Buddy Taylor Middle
    • Bunnell Elementary
    • Charter Schools
    • Daytona State College
    • Flagler County School Board
    • Flagler Palm Coast High School
    • Higher Education
    • Imagine School
    • Indian Trails Middle
    • Matanzas High School
    • Old Kings Elementary
    • Rymfire Elementary
    • Stetson University
    • Wadsworth Elementary
    • University of Florida/Florida State
  • Economy
    • Jobs & Unemployment
    • Business & Economy
    • Development & Sprawl
    • Leisure & Tourism
    • Local Business
    • Local Media
    • Real Estate & Development
    • Taxes
  • Commentary
    • The Conversation
    • Pierre Tristam
    • Diane Roberts
    • Guest Columns
    • Byblos
    • Editor's Blog
  • Culture
    • African American Cultural Society
    • Arts in Palm Coast & Flagler
    • Books
    • City Repertory Theatre
    • Flagler Auditorium
    • Flagler Playhouse
    • Flagler Youth Orchestra
    • Jacksonville Symphony Orchestra
    • Palm Coast Arts Foundation
    • Special Events
  • Elections 2024
    • Amendments and Referendums
    • Presidential Election
    • Campaign Finance
    • City Elections
    • Congressional
    • Constitutionals
    • Courts
    • Governor
    • Polls
    • Voting Rights
  • Florida
    • Federal Politics
    • Florida History
    • Florida Legislature
    • Florida Legislature
    • Ron DeSantis
  • Health & Society
    • Flagler County Health Department
    • Ask the Doctor Column
    • Health Care
    • Health Care Business
    • Covid-19
    • Children and Families
    • Medicaid and Medicare
    • Mental Health
    • Poverty
    • Violence
  • All Else
    • Daily Briefing
    • Americana
    • Obituaries
    • News Briefs
    • Weather and Climate
    • Wildlife

Florida Supreme Court Again Hammers Insurance Industry in Three Rulings

July 4, 2013 | FlaglerLive | 2 Comments

Be sure you have the right insurer. (Sam Beebe)
Be sure you have the right insurer. (Sam Beebe)

The insurance industry took a beating Wednesday in the Florida Supreme Court.

In three cases with widely different circumstances, Supreme Court justices ruled against insurance companies and in favor of policyholders and medical providers. The cases divided the court and, ultimately, all had financial implications for insurers and the other parties.

Perhaps the most closely watched case involved a dispute between Geico and medical provider Virtual Imaging Services, Inc., about payments for magnetic-resonance imaging tests that were performed after Geico customer Maria Tirado was injured in an auto accident in 2008.

Virtual Imaging sent a $3,600 bill to Geico under Tirado’s personal-injury protection coverage. But Geico, using a formula derived from Medicare fees, paid slightly less than $2,000, prompting a legal fight.

The Supreme Court, in a 5-2 opinion, ruled in favor of Virtual Imaging because it said Geico had not disclosed in the policy that it would use the Medicare-based payment formula. The Miami-Dade County case drew briefs from some major insurance-industry groups that supported Geico, while Virtual Imaging received briefs from groups including the Florida Medical Association.

Justice Barbara Pariente, who wrote the majority opinion, said state law allowed Geico to use the Medicare-based formula, but that the insurer needed to disclose its intent to do so. She pointed, for example, to an FMA argument that medical providers are concerned about reduced reimbursement rates and need to receive notice.

“In other words, the Medicare fee schedules set forth in (state law) provide an option for insurers, not the method of how the insurer exercises this option,” wrote Pariente, who was joined in the opinion by justices Jorge Labarga, R. Fred Lewis, James E.C. Perry and Peggy Quince. “In order to exercise the option, the insurer must provide notice in the policy of its election to use the fee schedules.”

But Justice Charles Canady, in a dissent joined by Chief Justice Ricky Polston, rejected the majority’s reasoning. Canady wrote that state law didn’t make the use of the Medicare-related fee amounts “operative only if it is specifically referred to in the text of the relevant policy.”

The court split along the same 5-2 lines in another Miami-Dade case that involved how much Florida Peninsula Insurance Co. should pay policyholder Amado Trinidad, whose home was damaged in a fire in 2008.

Trinidad had what is known as a “replacement cost policy” but did not repair or contract with someone else to repair the home. While Florida Peninsula was still required to pay replacement costs, the legal battle centered on whether those costs should include what otherwise would go to a general contractor’s overhead and profit.

In an opinion written by Pariente, the majority said those general-contractor costs should be factored in, just like other potential replacement expenses such as labor and materials.

“Simply put, overhead and profit are no different than any other costs of a repair that the insured is reasonably likely to incur, all of which are considered replacement costs and are not actually incurred until the repair is made —a requirement not imposed by (state law),” Pariente wrote. “Such an interpretation of replacement cost insurance —that is, excluding all costs until they are actually incurred —would in actuality render the coverage meaningless.”

Polston, in a dissent joined by Canady, argued the court should not have even taken up the case. He disputed that lower courts had conflicting opinions about the issue, a key justification for considering the case.

In the third insurance case Wednesday, justices split 4-3 — with Polston, Canady and Quince dissenting — in a class-action lawsuit that involved interpretation of policies for home health-care services.

The dispute focused on the scope of automatic benefit increases included in the policies. The majority, which ruled against Washington National Insurance Co., said language in the policies was ambiguous and, as a result, should be interpreted broadly in favor of policyholders.

“We … hold, consistent with our precedent, that where a contract of insurance is ambiguous, it is to be liberally construed in favor of coverage and strictly against the insurer,” Labarga wrote in the majority opinion.

Polston, writing in dissent, rejected the notion that the policy language was ambiguous, arguing it “means what it plainly says.”

–News Service of Florida

Support FlaglerLive's End of Year Fundraiser
Thank you readers for getting us to--and past--our year-end fund-raising goal yet again. It’s a bracing way to mark our 15th year at FlaglerLive. Our donors are just a fraction of the 25,000 readers who seek us out for the best-reported, most timely, trustworthy, and independent local news site anywhere, without paywall. FlaglerLive is free. Fighting misinformation and keeping democracy in the sunshine 365/7/24 isn’t free. Take a brief moment, become a champion of fearless, enlightening journalism. Any amount helps. We’re a 501(c)(3) non-profit news organization. Donations are tax deductible.  
You may donate openly or anonymously.
We like Zeffy (no fees), but if you prefer to use PayPal, click here.

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Geezer says

    July 4, 2013 at 7:17 pm

    The insurance industry is like a box of nails from your local hardware store.
    They both need to be hammered often.

    Bunch of crooks!

  2. Marissa says

    July 4, 2013 at 9:23 pm

    Good!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Conner Bosch law attorneys lawyers offices palm coast flagler county
  • grand living realty
  • politis matovina attorneys for justice personal injury law auto truck accidents

Primary Sidebar

  • grand living realty
  • politis matovina attorneys for justice personal injury law auto truck accidents

Recent Comments

  • FlaglerLive on John Thrasher, Who’d Represented Flagler County in the Senate and Led FSU, Dies at 81
  • FlaglerLive on ICE Arrests More Than 100 in Raid of Construction Site Near FSU
  • Pierre Tristam on Israel’s Catastrophic Starvation of Gaza’s Millions
  • Ann Walton on Flagler Beach Secures All FEMA Funds for New Pier, Construction of $14 Million Replacement Begins June 16
  • Mort on Answering Lawsuit, Palm Coast Accuses Mayor Norris of Frivolously Weaponizing Court Against Gambaro’s Legitimacy
  • Old Rumrunner on Sales Tax Cut Appears Dead as House and Senate Leaders Agree to More Limited Exemptions
  • Hazel the maid on Israel’s Catastrophic Starvation of Gaza’s Millions
  • Wow on Palm Coast Man, 55, Arrested on Felony Animal Cruelty Charge for Asphyxiating Dog That Attacked His Chihuahua
  • Dog Choke on Palm Coast Man, 55, Arrested on Felony Animal Cruelty Charge for Asphyxiating Dog That Attacked His Chihuahua
  • Ed P on ICE Arrests More Than 100 in Raid of Construction Site Near FSU
  • Joe D on The Daily Cartoon and Live Briefing: Saturday, May 31, 2025
  • Gary on Palm Coast Man, 55, Arrested on Felony Animal Cruelty Charge for Asphyxiating Dog That Attacked His Chihuahua
  • Sherry on Why the Far Right Fabricated the Myth of a Migrant ‘Invasion’
  • William Moya on Local Police Collaboration With ICE Undermines Public Safety
  • Marek on Local Police Collaboration With ICE Undermines Public Safety
  • Pogo on Local Police Collaboration With ICE Undermines Public Safety

Log in