Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

894 So. 2d 268

Docket No. 3D03-1587.

Cases v. Gray

Daniel CASES, Appellant, v. Richard A. GRAY, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 23, 2004.

Rehearing Denied September 22, 2004.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2004-06-23

Relies on 494 So. 2d 1143 - Lambrix v. State · 487 So. 2d 1079 - Stephens v. Renard · Holt v. King

Decided 2004-06-23

¶1Kubicki Draper and Sharon C. Degnan and Caryn L. Bellus, Miami, for appellant.

¶2Parks Camp and Daryl D. Parks (Tallahassee), for appellee.

¶3Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and SHEVIN, J., and DAUKSCH, JAMES C., Jr., Senior Judge.

¶4SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

¶5The issue before the court is precisely the one involved in Holt v. King, 707 So.2d 1141, 1142 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998):

"[W]hether an insured tortfeasor, appellant in this case, is entitled to a set-off for Personal Injury Protection (PIP) when the claimant is uninsured in contravention of Florida's no-fault laws."

¶6The trial court in this case disallowed the appellant a PIP setoff. As in Holt, we disagree. On the authority of, and for the reasons well expressed in Holt, we hold that a PIP setoff is required and therefore reverse the judgment below for further consistent proceedings. Conflict is certified with Stephens v. Renard, 487 So.2d 1079 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), review denied, 494 So.2d 1152 (Fla.1986) and Jedlicka v. Proctor, 724 So.2d 668 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).

¶7Reversed and remanded.

/894/so2d/268 · .json · Public domain