Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. King

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. King

479 So. 2d 278, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2714, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17235

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 6, 1985

DocketNo. 84-2738

StatusPublished

This text of 479 So. 2d 278 (Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. King) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. King, 479 So. 2d 278, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2714, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17235 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc., filed an action in the trial court seeking to recover from the appellees, King, his employer and his employer’s insurance carrier, the medical expenses it was required contractually to pay on behalf of its insured, Heinrich, who was injured in an automobile accident as a result of King’s negligence. The trial court granted the appellee’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. The appellant contends before us that it has the right to subrogation as a part of the common law of Florida and that application of the collateral source rule, codified in section 627.7372, Florida Statutes, offends its access to the courts guaranteed in Article I, Section 21 of the Florida Constitution. We disagree. Based upon Prince v. American Indemnity Company, 431 So.2d 270 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), and the more recent decisions reached in Blue Cross And Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. Matthews, 473 So.2d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), and Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., 472 So.2d 1373 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), we affirm the trial court.

GRIMES, A.C.J., and FRANK and HALL, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc., filed an action in the trial court seeking to recover from the appellees, King, his employer and his employer’s insurance carrier, the medical expenses it was required contractually to pay on behalf of its insured, Heinrich, who was injured in an automobile accident as a result of King’s negligence. The trial court granted the appellee’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. The appellant contends before us that it has the right to subrogation as a part of the common law of Florida and that application of the collateral source rule, codified in section 627.7372, Florida Statutes, offends its access to the courts guaranteed in Article I, Section 21 of the Florida Constitution. We disagree. Based upon Prince v. American Indemnity Company, 431 So.2d 270 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), and the more recent decisions reached in Blue Cross And Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. Matthews, 473 So.2d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), and Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., 472 So.2d 1373 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), we affirm the trial court.

GRIMES, A.C.J., and FRANK and HALL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

479 So. 2d 278, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2714, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blue-cross-blue-shield-of-florida-inc-v-king-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack