HomeMy WebLinkAbout2911 ' ~ _
prior suit for personal injury benefits. This order reserved
jurisdiction to determine issues of equitable distribution. of
attorneys fees and costs.
Plaintiff/Crossdefendaat Fireman moved for a summary
judgment on the issue of medical payments and under-insured '
motorist coverage_by a motion"for summary judgment filed October
12, 1978. Based on that motion, a summary judgment- was entered
on November 27, 1978 against Third Party Defendants/Crossplaintiffs
May and Smith, and for the Crossdefendant, Fireman on the cross-
claim of May and Smith. This summary judgment on the crossclaim
was actually a partial summary judgment on the crossclaim because
it was based on Fireman's motion for summary judgment on the issues
of medical payments, benefits, and under-insured motorist coverage.
The motion did not move for, and the summary judgment on the
crossclaim did not rule on the issue of attorneys fees for May and
Smith's crossclaim against Fireman.
William C. Hay, who was insured by Fireman, was in-
volved in an automobile accident with Betty Baldwin, who was in-
sured by Aetna, on January 22, 1975 in St. Lucie County, Florida.
As a result of this accident, May received personal injury pro-
4
tection benefits from Fireman in the amount of $5,000. Thereafter,
Aetna entered into a Settlement agreement with May in the amount
k
of $35,000. Aetna failed to make May and Fireman joint payees
on the settlement draft or payment. Also, Fireman did not consent
~ to a different method~of payment for their subrogation rights.
Fireman seeks to recover the entire amount of PIP
~ benefits .of $5,000 it paid to Hay, its insured. Fireman contends
that under F.S. 627.736(3)(c), Laws of 1975, it is entitled .to
indemnification for the entire amount it paid to May, its insured,
for PIP benefits. Fireman argues that under indemnification, it
is entitled to the entire amount paid, plus its attorneys fees,
f
s
and equitable distribution of the amount received is immaterial
under subsection (c). In essence, Fireman argues that failure of
Aetna to make Fireman and May-joint payees of the .settlement check
or failure to obtain Fireman's consent to a different method of
~ ~ i
-2-
~ tl PI~GftL+~1J 1
~