GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
v.
FINLAY DIAGNOSTIC CENTER, INC., A/A/O MARIA P. CRUZ

Fla. 3d DCA | 2021-04-28
No. 21-0026
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2021)

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

Geico General Insurance Company appealed a summary judgment entered in favor of Finlay Diagnostic Center, Inc., challenging the trial court's interpretation of Florida Statutes section 627.736(1)(a)(5). The appellate court reversed and remanded, finding that the lower tribunal did not have the benefit of the court's prior decision in Geico General Insurance Co. v. Beacon Healthcare Center Inc. when rendering judgment.


Holding

The court reversed and remanded the summary judgment, finding that the lower tribunal erred in its interpretation of section 627.736(1)(a)(5), Florida Statutes, as it did not have the benefit of the court's decision in Geico General Insurance Co. v. Beacon Healthcare Center Inc. when rendering judgment.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court's interpretation of Florida Statutes section 627.736(1)(a)(5) may be erroneous where rendered without benefit of subsequent appellate precedent providing co…

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

Facts & Procedural History

Geico brought an action against Finlay Diagnostic Center, Inc., a/a/o Maria P. Cruz involving an interpretation of statutory provisions regarding insu…

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

Opinion filed April 28, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D21-0026 Lower Tribunal Nos. 14-281 CC &18-360 AP ________________

Geico General Insurance Company,

Appellant,

vs.

Finlay Diagnostic Center, Inc., a/a/o Maria P. Cruz, Appellee.

An appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Gloria Gonzalez-Meyer, Judge. Kubicki Draper P.A., and Caryn L. Bellus, and Angela C. Flowers, for appellant. David B. Pakula, P.A., and David B. Pakula (Pembroke Pines); and Corredor, Husseini & Snedaker, P.A., and Tim Snedaker, for appellee. Before SCALES, MILLER, and LOBREE, JJ. MILLER, J.

Appellant, Geico General Insurance Company, challenges a final summary judgment entered in favor of appellee, Finlay Diagnostic Center, Inc.1 On appeal, Geico contends the lower tribunal erred in interpreting section 627.736(1)(a)(5), Florida Statutes. Recognizing the court did not have the benefit of our decision in Geico General Insurance Co. v. Beacon Healthcare Center Inc., 298 So. 3d 1235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020), at the time judgment was rendered, we agree.2 Accordingly, we reverse and remand the order under review.3 See also S. Owners Ins. Co. v. Hendrickson, 299 So. 3d 524 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020).

Reversed and remanded.

Footnotes
1 We discern no error in the trial court’s conclusion “[the x-rays] were taken by a licensed radiographer.” 2 We reject the contention Geico was enjoined from relying upon the relevant provisions of the statute. See McCarty v. Myers, 125 So. 3d 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). 3 The parties urge us to address a myriad of other unbriefed issues. As “it is well-settled that ‘[t]he [t]ipsy [c]oachman doctrine does not apply to grounds not raised in a motion for summary judgment,’” we decline the invitation. Sousa v. Zuni Transp., Inc., 286 So. 3d 820, 822 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (citations omitted).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw