GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY v. TOTAL ORTHOPAEDICS CARE P.A. a/a/o VALENTA AUBERRY

District Court of Appeal of Florida

GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY v. TOTAL ORTHOPAEDICS CARE P.A. a/a/o VALENTA AUBERRY

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 18, 2021

Docket21-0231

StatusPublished

This text of GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY v. TOTAL ORTHOPAEDICS CARE P.A. a/a/o VALENTA AUBERRY (GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY v. TOTAL ORTHOPAEDICS CARE P.A. a/a/o VALENTA AUBERRY) 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

GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY v. TOTAL ORTHOPAEDICS CARE P.A. a/a/o VALENTA AUBERRY, (Fla. Ct. App. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY, Appellant,

v.

TOTAL ORTHOPAEDICS CARE, P.A., a/a/o VALENTA AUBERRY, Appellee.

No. 4D21-231

[August 18, 2021]

Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Robert W. Lee, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 062016SC019741AXXXCE and 062018AP025702AXCCCE.

Michael A. Rosenberg, Peter D. Weinstein, and Adrianna de la Cruz- Muñoz of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Plantation, for appellant.

David B. Pakula of David B. Pakula, P.A., Pembroke Pines, and Gary Marks of Marks & Fleischer, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Geico Indemnity Company appeals the county court’s judgment against it. For the reasons we explained in Geico Indemnity Co. v. Muransky Chiropractic P.A., No. 4D21-457, 2021 WL 2584107 (Fla. 4th DCA June 24, 2021), and in our opinion in Geico General Ins. Co. v. Hallandale Beach Orthopedics, Inc., 4D21-206 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 18, 2021), we reverse and remand. On remand, the court must determine, or the parties must stipulate, whether the amount billed was less than 80% of 200% of the statutory fee schedule. If so, the court may enter judgment against Geico in accordance with Muransky.

Reversed and remanded.

DAMOORGIAN, KUNTZ and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

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

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY, Appellant,

v.

TOTAL ORTHOPAEDICS CARE, P.A., a/a/o VALENTA AUBERRY, Appellee.

No. 4D21-231

[August 18, 2021]

Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Robert W. Lee, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 062016SC019741AXXXCE and 062018AP025702AXCCCE.

Michael A. Rosenberg, Peter D. Weinstein, and Adrianna de la Cruz- Muñoz of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Plantation, for appellant.

David B. Pakula of David B. Pakula, P.A., Pembroke Pines, and Gary Marks of Marks & Fleischer, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Geico Indemnity Company appeals the county court’s judgment against it. For the reasons we explained in Geico Indemnity Co. v. Muransky Chiropractic P.A., No. 4D21-457, 2021 WL 2584107 (Fla. 4th DCA June 24, 2021), and in our opinion in Geico General Ins. Co. v. Hallandale Beach Orthopedics, Inc., 4D21-206 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 18, 2021), we reverse and remand. On remand, the court must determine, or the parties must stipulate, whether the amount billed was less than 80% of 200% of the statutory fee schedule. If so, the court may enter judgment against Geico in accordance with Muransky.

Reversed and remanded.

DAMOORGIAN, KUNTZ and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY v. TOTAL ORTHOPAEDICS CARE P.A. a/a/o VALENTA AUBERRY, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/geico-indemnity-company-v-total-orthopaedics-care-pa-aao-valenta-fladistctapp-2021.