SMALL FRAUD DEFEATS CLAIM
WITHDRAWAL OF FRAUDULENT PORTION OF CLAIM DOES NOT ELIMINATE FRAUD
Star Casualty Insurance Company appealed a summary final judgment and attorney fee award entered in favor of Gables Insurance Recovery, Inc., as assignee of Star Casualty's insured, Ana Maria Correa. Star Casualty alleges that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment due to genuine issues of material fact concerning whether Correa's medical bills for diagnostic imaging procedures were medically necessary and related to the underlying accident for purposes of section 627.736, Florida Statutes. Additionally, Star Casualty alleged that the trial court reversibly erred by striking four affirmative defenses from its amended answer that could have exempted it from liability for the claim.
Star Casualty Insurance Company v. Gables Insurance Recovery, Inc., a/a/o Ana Maria Correa, Nos. 3D21-0033, 3D21-0377, Florida Court of Appeals, Third District (July 20, 2022)
FACTS
Correa was involved in a vehicle accident on January 19, 2009 and sustained injuries. Subsequently, Correa received diagnostic imaging procedures costing a total of $3,375.00, and Gables, as her assignee, submitted a claim to the insurer for reimbursement of eighty percent of the reasonable medical expenses pursuant to section 627.736(1)(a). After the insurer paid only $400.71 and denied the remainder of the claim, Gables sued to recover the remaining costs.
Star Casualty proffered an affidavit by Edward A. Dauer, M.D., opining that the charges were not medically necessary or related to the accident. This affidavit also noted that three of the imaging procedures performed on Correa appeared to have been improperly upcoded or unbundled with other procedures.
Based on Dr. Dauer's affidavit, Star Casualty also amended its answer to add affirmative defenses asserting that it was exempt from paying the entire because the three charges were fraudulent, upcoded, or unbundled. Prior to the summary judgment hearing, Gables voluntarily withdrew its claims for reimbursement of the three charges Star Casualty based its affirmative defenses on. Gables then moved to strike the defenses from Star Casualty's answer, alleging that the withdrawal of the claims for those three charges made the corresponding defenses irrelevant and moot.
-
10:17
Barry Zalma, Inc. on Insurance Law
3 months agoWho's on First - Defense and/or Indemnity
93 -
0:49
Mr Producer Media
1 year agoRep Lofgren: Trump Knew His Election Fraud Claim Was False
1509 -
0:06
melee337
1 year agoSmall crab
7 -
16:12
NC Dirt Hunter
6 hours agoCivil War ground gives up its secrets! Metal Detecting with the Minelab Manticore
53 -
1:04:53
ReasonTV
14 hours agoPhil Magness: Who Really Pays The Most Taxes?
3272 -
LIVE
Rekieta Law
2 hours agoDaniel Perry Pardoned, Cohen Pressed, NFL Shaken, Clarence Thomas Grilled, ADL Most Affected
2,898 watching -
LIVE
Price of Reason
6 hours agoAmazon Wants FEMINIST Tomb Raider! Gaming DEI Agenda EXPOSED w/ Dreadroberts
1,770 watching -
1:38:48
TheMonicaCrowleyPodcast
10 hours agoThe 2020 to 2024 Trek Clean Elections
3.95K5 -
LIVE
Akademiks
3 hours agoHappy Birthday Big AK. Lets bring it in together chat.
6,555 watching -
1:28:57
The Charlie Kirk Show
5 hours agoTHOUGHTCRIME Ep. 44 — Is Doxxing Dead? Poo-Loving Libs? The Truth About Pearl Harbor?
46.9K53