BRANDON FOREST, APPELLANT,
v.
ASHLEY MICHELLE SUTHERLAND, APPELLEE
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.
In a negligence case arising from a car accident, the trial court reduced the plaintiff's jury verdict for medical expenses by the full amount of PIP (Personal Injury Protection) benefits paid, resulting in judgment for the defendant. The appellate court reversed, holding that the collateral source setoff must be reduced by the amount of premiums the plaintiff paid to obtain PIP coverage.
The trial court erred by not reducing the collateral source setoff by the amount of premiums paid by the plaintiff to obtain PIP coverage. Under Florida Statute § 768.76(1), any collateral source reduction must be offset to the extent of amounts paid, contributed, or forfeited by the claimant to secure the right to collateral source benefits.
[1] A collateral source reduction of damages must be offset by the amount paid by the claimant to secure the collateral source benefit.
[2] A trial court errs by failing to reduce a collateral source set-off by the amount of premiums paid by the plaintiff for PIP coverage.
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“any collateral source reduction of damages shall be offset to the extent of any amount which has been paid, contributed, or forfeited by, or on behalf of, the claimant or members of the claimant's immediate family to secure her or his right to any collateral source benefit which the claimant is receiving as a result of her or his injury.”
This statutory provision from § 768.76(1) establishes that collateral source setoffs must account for amounts paid by the claimant to obtain those benefits.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Brandon Forest was injured in a car accident caused by defendant Ashley Michelle Sutherland. A jury awarded Forest $9,737 for past medical e…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Collateral Source Rule cases and more on FLexlaw
We reverse the final judgment in favor of the defendant because we find error in the trial court’s failure to offset any collateral source reduction by the amount of premiums paid by the plaintiff in obtaining PIP coverage. Although we reverse on this issue, we are not persuaded by the other arguments on appeal.
The plaintiff was injured in a car accident and sued the defendant in a negligence action. The defendant was determined to be liable, and the jury awarded $9,737.00 for past medical expenses. There were no other damages awarded.
The defendant filed a motion for collateral source setoff for PIP benefits paid or payable. This motion argued that any award for past medical expenses should be reduced by $10,000 for PIP benefits paid or payable. The trial court agreed and entered a final judgment in favor of the defendant, which stated: “the Court having reduced the verdict by collateral source PIP payments paid or payable, be it ordered and adjudged that Plaintiff shall take nothing by this action and that Defendant ... shall go hence without day.” Thereafter, the plaintiff filed a motion to vacate the final judgment. At the hearing on the motion to vacate, the plaintiff admitted that “PIP paid out $10,000.” The plaintiff also argued that the set-off should be reduced by the amount of premiums paid by the plaintiff to obtain PIP coverage. The trial court denied the plaintiffs motion to vacate, and this appeal followed.
*526Section 768.76(1) provides that any collateral source reduction of damages
shall be offset to the extent of any amount which has been paid, contributed, or forfeited by, or on behalf of, the claimant or members of the claimant’s immediate family to secure her or his right to any collateral source benefit which the claimant is receiving as a result of her or his injury.
§ 768.76(1), Fla. Stat. (1999). When an award of damages is reduced according to the amount of PIP benefits paid to the plaintiff, section 768.76(1) “allow[s] a reduction from the setoffs for the plaintiffs cost of obtaining PIP coverage....” McKenna v. Carlson, 771 So.2d 555, 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
We remand this case to the lower court because the court failed to consider reducing the collateral source set-off by the amount paid by the plaintiff in obtaining those collateral source benefits. On remand, and in accordance with McKenna and section 768.76, Florida Statutes, the lower court shall determine the amount paid by the plaintiff in obtaining PIP coverage. That amount shall then be used to offset against any reduction in damages awarded to the plaintiff based on PIP benefits paid as a result of his injury. Accordingly, we reverse and remand this case for further proceedings.
Reversed and Remanded.
DAMOORGIAN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Matrisciani v. Garrison Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 298 So. 3d 53 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020)…e past premium payments she made without further explanation. This was error. As Matrisciani rightly contends, “section 768.76(1) ‘allow[s] a reduction from the setoffs for the plaintiff’s cost of obtaining PIP coverage[.]’” Forest v. Sutherland, 110 So. 3d 525, 526 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (quoting McKenna v. Carlson, 771 So. 2d 555, 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)). Therefore, the court should have also awarded Matrisciani a credit for the premium payments made on her PIP policy. Matrisciani also claims error in the…
Authorities Cited
- McKENNA v. Carlson, 771 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)