Daytona Beach Personal Injury Lawyers
Free Consultations 386.258.1622

Florida Third DCA rules that statutory examples contained in Fla. Stat. § 671.210 of a “conspicuous statement” satisfying Florida’s Accord and Satisfaction statute are illustrative and not exhaustive

On August 25, 2021, in United Automobile Insurance Company v. Rivero Diagnostic Center, No. 3D21-60, the Florida Third DCA reversed a trial court’s summary judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff medical provider in a PIP insurance case, finding that the insurance company had a valid accord and satisfaction defense. The Third DCA ruled that the language on the check issued by the defendant, which was deposited by the plaintiff, satisfied the “conspicuous statement” requirement of Florida’s Accord and Satisfaction statute, § 673.3111(2), Florida Statutes (2008). The question at issue was whether the language on the check issued by the defendant and deposited by the plaintiff, which stated “FULL & FINAL PAYMENT OF PIP BENEFITS,” satisfied the “conspicuous statement” requirement of Florida’s Accord and Satisfaction statute, § 673.3111(2), Florida Statutes (2008). The term “conspicuous” is defined to include language that is “so written, displayed, or presented that a reasonable person against which it is to operate ought to have noticed it.” § 671.201(10). The Third DCA ruled that although the check language did not satisfy any of the examples described in the definitional section of § 671.201(10), “[a] plain reading of the statute reveals that these are simply examples of conspicuousness, and that they are not the exclusive manner by which a statement or term can be deemed conspicuous.”

Categories: