← Case library
3rd DCAAugust 25, 2021Reversed and Remanded🔬 Novel Issue

United Automobile Insurance Company v. Rivero Diagnostic Center, Inc., a/a/o Carlos Bacallao

Case No. 21-0060

A PIP insurer issued a check bearing the language "FULL & FINAL PAYMENT OF PIP BENEFITS" on the payee line, which the medical-provider assignee endorsed and cashed before suing for additional benefits. The trial court granted summary judgment against the insurer's accord and satisfaction defense, finding the language not "conspicuous" under section 673.3111(2). The Third DCA reversed, holding the notation was conspicuous as a matter of law because section 671.201(10)'s listed formats are merely examples and the controlling test is whether attention can reasonably be expected to be called to the term.

Key facts

  • PIP insurer United Automobile Insurance Company issued a check to medical provider Rivero Diagnostic Center with 'FULL & FINAL PAYMENT OF PIP BENEFITS' printed on the payee line; the provider endorsed and cashed the check before suing for additional benefits.
  • The provider claimed the accord and satisfaction language was not sufficiently conspicuous under Florida Statute section 673.3111(2), and the trial court granted summary judgment in the provider's favor on that issue.
  • +1 more key fact with a free trial

Why it matters

This appears to be the first Florida appellate decision squarely holding that a 'full and final payment' notation on the face of a check is conspicuous under section 673.3111(2), a recurring battleground in PIP and… — full analysis with a trial

🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.

Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.

Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.