Florida PIP Law Injunction Remains in Effect

A Florida judge has upheld his temporary injunction partially blocking portions of the state’s automobile no-fault insurance personal injury protection (PIP) law on the basis it infringes on drivers’ access to the courts. Regulators are appealing to a higher court.

Second Circuit Court Judge Terry Lewis upheld his initial decision in a case [Myers v. McCarty] filed on behalf of acupuncturists, massage therapists, and chiropractors.

The acupuncturists and massage therapists said the new law threatens their livelihood by excluding them from the list of PIP providers and preventing them from being paid for treating injured drivers.

Chiropractors also argued the new law unfairly restricts their payments by providing medical coverage for drivers with emergency injuries up to $10,000 while drivers with non-emergency injuries only receive $2,500 in coverage.

In his initial ruling, Lewis said the restrictions no longer made PIP a “reasonable alternative” to a tort system.

On revisiting the case, Lewis said he is still sensitive to the medical providers’ concerns. However, he said, the injunction is foremost to protect individuals’ rights to access the courts.

“The reason for issuing the injunction was to protect the constitutional right and prevent the potential harm to citizens injured in auto accidents who, under the present PIP statute, may not receive necessary medical care,” Lewis stated.

Lewis said that after weighing that against the difficulties the injunction created for regulators and insurers, he still found that the “equities tip in favor of allowing the temporary injunction to remain in effect.”

Donovan Brown, Florida counsel for state relations for the Property Insurers Association, said the association is disappointed in the ruling and what it means for the PIP law.

“Florida consumers deserve the full benefit of the 2012 reforms,” said Brown. “This ruling gives way to the fraud and abuse those reforms were designed to eliminate.”

In response to Lewis’ ruling, the Office of Insurance Regulation (OIR) filed a motion with Florida’s First District Court of Appeal seeking an expedited review of the temporary injunction.

The OIR’s motion is not a response to the issues raised in Myers v. McCarty, but instead addresses the validity of Lewis’ injunction.

OIR claims that Lewis’ injunction ignores the Florida Supreme Court’s standard that a statute has a presumption of constitutionality unless it appears beyond all reasonable doubt to be in conflict with a state constitutional provision.

The OIR says it has been given no direction on how to comply with the injunction.

“The injunction order did not suddenly remove the provisions from law; it sought to enjoin the OIR from enforcing them. How that will affect millions of motorists and their existing policies is…unclear,” according to the motion.

Gov. Rick Scott had vowed to “continue to fight” to save the PIP reform, a centerpiece of his legislative agenda last year. However, he has left it to lawmakers to come up with a response.

Lawmakers appear poised to rely on the legal system to resolve the issue as opposed to taking legislative action after a consensus could not be reached on a response.

Brown acknowledged that at this point there “is no appetite among legislators to address PIP reform this session.”

Topics Florida Legislation