UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,
v.
MILLENNIUM RADIOLOGY, LLC, D/B/A MILLENNIUM OPEN MRI, A/A/O JEAN DEVAUGHN,
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.
The identity of parties element of collateral estoppel is not met where assignees and medical providers are identical but the insured or assignor is different.
[1] The identity of parties element of collateral estoppel is not satisfied where the assignees and medical providers are identical but the insured or assignor is different.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceUnited Automobile Insurance Company appealed a final summary judgment entered in favor of Millennium Radiology, LLC. The case involved a collateral es…
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 Estoppel cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed June 15, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-2093 Lower Tribunal No. 13-136 SP ________________
United Automobile Insurance Company, Appellant,
vs.
Millennium Radiology, LLC, d/b/a Millennium Open MRI, a/a/o Jean DeVaughn, Appellee.
An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Ayana Harris, Judge.
Michael J. Neimand, for appellant.
David B. Pakula, P.A., and David B. Pakula (Pembroke Pines); Marks & Fleischer, P.A., and Gary Marks (Fort Lauderdale), for appellee.
Before LOGUE, HENDON and GORDO, JJ.
GORDO, J.
2
United Automobile Insurance Company appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of Millennium Radiology, LLC. We have jurisdiction. Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A). United Auto argues on appeal that “the identity of the parties” element of collateral estoppel is not met where the assignees and medical providers are identical but the insured or assignor is different. While we recognize that the trial court was without the benefit of our decision in United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Millennium Radiology, LLC, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D175a (Fla. 3d DCA Jan. 12, 2022) at the time judgment was rendered, we nonetheless agree. Accordingly, we reverse and remand. Reversed and remanded