UNIVERSAL X RAYS, CORP. A/A/O ALEJANDRO BOTERO CANO
v.
INFINITY AUTO INSURANCE COMPANY
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.
Once an insurer exhausts a policyholder's PIP benefits through sequential payment of valid claims in good faith, the insurer has no further liability on unresolved pending claims absent evidence of bad faith in claims handling.
[1] Once personal injury protection benefits are exhausted through payment of valid claims in good faith, an insurer has no further liability on unresolved pending claims abs…
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 intelligence“Once the PIP benefits are exhausted through the payment of valid claims, an insurer has no further liability on unresolved, pending claims, absent bad faith in the handling of the claim by the insurance company.”
Court citing GEICO Indem. Co. v. Gables Ins. Recovery, Inc., 159 So. 3d 151, 155 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)
Universal X Rays Corp., as assignee of insured Alejandro Botero Cano, sought PIP benefits from Infinity Auto Insurance Company. Infinity had sequentia…
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 Policy Limits cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed September 23, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D25-1902
Lower Tribunal No. 23-3360-SP-05
Universal X Rays, Corp., a/a/o Alejandro Botero Cano, Appellant,
vs.
Infinity Auto Insurance Company, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Luis Perez- Medina, Judge.
Robert J. Lee, P.A., and Robert J. Lee, for appellant.
Law Offices of Terry M. Torres & Associates, and Robert Phaneuf, for appellee.
Before LINDSEY, MILLER, and BOKOR, JJ.
MILLER, J.
Appellant, Universal X Rays Corp., as the assignee of Alejandro Botero Cano, the insured, appeals from a trial court order adjudicating crossmotions for summary judgment in favor of appellee, Infinity Auto Insurance Company, the insurer. Our de novo review of the record yields no error in the finding below that the summary judgment evidence established that Infinity exhausted the policy limits of the insured's personal injury protection ("PIP”) benefits by sequentially paying valid claims in good faith. See GEICO Indem. Co. v. Gables Ins. Recovery, Inc., 159 So. 3d 151, 155 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) ("Once the PIP benefits are exhausted through the payment of valid claims, an insurer has no further liability on unresolved, pending claims, absent bad faith in the handling of the claim by the insurance company.” (quoting Northwoods Sports Med. & Physical Rehab., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 137 So. 3d 1049, 1057 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014))); Progressive Am. Ins. Co. v. Stand-Up MRI of Orlando, 990 So. 2d 3, 8 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (holding the insurer was not required to pay PIP benefits to provider because insured's coverage had been exhausted); see also Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(a) (“The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law."); Whitlow v. Tallahassee Mem’l HealthCare, Inc., 421 So. 3d 729, 735–36 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023) (“One of the principal
purposes of the summary judgment rule is to isolate and dispose of factually unsupported claims or defenses." (quoting Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323-24 (1986))). We therefore affirm.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (U.S. 1986)
- Northwoods Sports Med. & Physical Rehab., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. & USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 137 So. 3d 1049 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
- Progressive Am. Ins. Co. v. Stand-Up MRI OF Orlando, 990 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
- GEICO Indem. Co. v. Gables Ins. Recovery, Inc., 159 So. 3d 151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)