UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE
v.
MIAMI DADE COUNTY MRI MELIDA SOLIS

11th Cir. Ct. App. Div. | 2020-06-23
No. 2018-146-AP-01
1 FLCA 6903 Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court, Appellate Division (2020)

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.

Synopsis

United Automobile Insurance Company appeals a summary judgment granted in favor of Miami-Dade County MRI Corp. regarding medical bill reasonableness. The appellate court reverses, finding it was an abuse of discretion to exclude UAIC's conflicting affidavit on whether the medical bills were reasonable in price.

Holding

The trial court abused its discretion by excluding UAIC's conflicting affidavit on the reasonableness of medical bills. Taking the excluded affidavit into account, summary judgment was improper and the judgment must be reversed.

Headnotes

[1] Excluding a conflicting affidavit on the reasonableness of medical bills constitutes an abuse of discretion, warranting reversal of summary judgment.

[2] Summary judgment is improper when a party's excluded affidavit, if considered, would create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the reasonableness of medical bills…

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
Key Quotes

“it was an abuse of discretion to exclude UAIC's conflicting affidavit on whether the medical bills at issue were reasonable in price”

Statement of the core holding establishing that exclusion of conflicting affidavit on bill reasonableness was improper

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence
Facts & Procedural History

UAIC challenged summary judgment entered in favor of the medical provider regarding reasonableness of medical bills. The trial court excluded UAIC's a…

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.

Opinion of the Court

Before: TRAWICK, WALSH and DE LA O1, JJ.

COPIES FURNISHED TO COUNSEL

OF RECORD AND TO ANY PARTY

NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

Footnotes
1 Judge de la O did not participate in oral argument. Filing # 110921041 E-Filed 07/28/2020 03:36:38 PM [*2] Page 2 of 3 PER CURIAM. On June 23, 2020, we issued an opinion reversing the trial court’s final summary judgment. Appellee Miami-Dade County MRI Corp., a/a/o Melinda Solis has moved for rehearing. We grant rehearing, vacate our opinion and issue the following opinion in its place. (UAIC) appeals the trial court’s order granting final summary judgment on behalf of the Provider. As this panel and the majority of prior panels from this Court have found, it was an abuse of discretion to exclude UAIC’s conflicting affidavit on whether the medical bills at issue were reasonable in price. Taking UAIC’s excluded affidavit into account, it was error to grant summary judgment. See State Farm Mutual Ins. Co. v. Gables Insurance Recovery a/a/o Yuderis Rego, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 860a (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. Nov. 20. 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co. v. Open MRI of Miami Dade, Ltd. a/a/o Rosa Castillo, Case No. 2017-326-AP-01 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. Nov. 6, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Miami Dade County MRI, Corp. a/a/o Marta Figueredo, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 506b (Fla. 11th Cir. App. July 30, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Miami Dade County MRI, Corp. a/a/o Javier Rodriguez, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 225c (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. July 25, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Miami Dade County MRI, Corp. a/a/o Rene Dechard, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 226a (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct., [*3] Page 3 of 3 August 12, 2019); United Automobile Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Millennium Radiology, LLC a/a/o Javier Rodriguez, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 911b (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct., July 19, 2019). Accordingly, the summary judgment and final judgment entered below are hereby REVERSED, and this cause is REMANDED to the trial court. Appellee’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is DENIED. Appellant’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is conditionally GRANTED (conditioned upon Appellant ultimately prevailing and the enforceability of the proposal for settlement) and REMANDED to the trial court to fix amount.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw