Preview
Filing # 178184540 E-Filed 07/25/2023 02:28:22 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
TWENTIETH JUDICIAL
CASE NO.: 23-CA-000551
STEPHANIE STABRYLLA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
ELIZABETH WHITKOPF and SAFECO INSURANCE
COMPANY OF ILLINOIS,
Defendants.
/
DEFENDANT, SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS’ ANSWER TO
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS by and through the
undersigned counsel, for the Answer to the Plaintiff’s Complaint says:
1. Admit for jurisdictional purposes only.
2. Admit.
3. Without sufficient knowledge and, therefore, deny.
4. Admit.
5. Admit.
6. Admit.
COUNT I
CLAIM OF STEPHANIE STABRYLLA AGAINST
Count I, paragraphs 7 through 8 are not di
COUNT II
CLAIM OF STEPHANIE ST ABRYLLA AGAINST
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS
Defendant re-alleges and reasserts its responses to paragraphs 1-8 above.
9. Defendant admits the existence of a policy of automobile insurance which
the policy, and that the policy was in effect on the date of the accident alleged in the Complaint.
Defendant denies all remaining allegations.
10. Deny.
11. Admit.
12. Without sufficient knowledge and, therefore, deny.
13. Deny.
14. Deny.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
15. Defendant affirmatively alleges that Plai
caused by or contributed to by Plaintiff’s own negligence, and therefore, Defendant is entitled to
for by F.S. 768.81 and a proportionate reduction or
bar to Plaintiffs damages.
16. Defendant affirmatively alleges that at the time of the accident, Plaintiff was
unreasonable in failing to use an available and
to the proximate cause of
17. Defendant affirmatively alleges that the Plaintiff failed to mi
any, and therefore, is not entitled to recovery d have been mitigated.
Plaintiff’s failure to mitigate includes: failing to follow the instructions and recommendations of
her/his health care providers, failing to seek or maintain comparable full time employment,
failing to submit all payable medical bills to his/her health insurer (and instead, executing a letter
of protection to his/her medical provider), thus, depriving Defenda
available as a third party benefi
Frohman, 901 So 2d 830 (Fla. 2005); Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corp v. Lasky, 868 So 2d 547 (4th
DCA 2003); Fla. Stat. 641.3154, and by obtaining medi
when comparable care was available at reasonable prices had plaintiff made any reasonable
inquiry.
18. Defendant affirmatively alleges that Defendant is entitled to the procedures,
ida Statutes, Section 627.737, and the Plaintiff’s claims are barred
the Florida Motor Vehicle No Fault Act, Florida Statutes
Section 627.730 through Section 627.7405 because Plaintiff fails to meet the threshold
provisions of said Act outlined in Florida Statutes Section 627.737. Defendant denies that the
Plaintiff is entitled to recover by e tort exemption provided by the
Statute.
19. Defendant affirmatively alleges that Pl
trier of fact for any PIP benefits received, or payable, and any reductions required by Florida
20. Defendant affirmatively alleges that if some or all of Plai
payable, Plaintiff is not entitled to duplicate recovery of these amounts or, in the alternative,
evidence of collateral source payments should be submitted to the jury. Additionally, Plaintiff is
not entitled to recover the amounts of any managed care adjust
Plaintiff’s health care providers to Plaintiff’s medical bills, in accordance with billing
Plaintiff’s health insurer, (2) Medicaid, (3) Medicare, or (4)
any other third-party payor. See, Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corp. v. Lasky, 868 So.2d 547 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2003); Cooperative Leasing, Inc. v. Johnson, 872 So.2d 956 (Fla
Nationwide Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 890 So.2d
write-offs or adjustments to Plaintiff’s medical bi ealth care providers in
accordance with their managed care or other agreements with Plaintiff’s HMO, health insurer,
21. Defendant affirmatively alleges that
22. Defendant affirmatively alleges that certain non-parties,
will notify the Plaintiff of the identity and nature of the negligence as soon as practicable. If no
non-party fault is identified in di rily withdraw this defense.
23. Defendant affirmatively alleges that pur
entitled to a setoff for any payment received from
as are sought in this litigation.
24. Defendant affirmatively alleges that Pl
nt is entitled to the defenses and limitations provided for by
25. Defendant affirmatively alleges that the Pl
conditions precedent to the filing of this action.
26. Defendant affirmatively alleges that it is not liable for any damages that exceed
described in Plaintiff’s Complaint.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS
trial by jury on all issues so triable.
Frank P. Diplacido, III Esq, Morgan & Morgan, Primary E-mail:
fdiplacido@forthepeople.com; pneira@forthepe
LAW OFFICE OF IGNACIO M. SARMIENTO
PO Box 7217
London, KY 40742
Telephone: 305-670-9339
Attorney for Defendant, Safeco
Laura W. Johnson, Esq., FBN 113572
Primary E-mail (eservice only): FortMyersLegalMail@libertymutual.com
Secondary E-mail: Laura.Johnson02@Libertymutual.com
Preview
Filing # 178184540 E-Filed 07/25/2023 02:28:22 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CASE NO.: 23-CA-000551 STEPHANIE STABRYLLA, Plaintiff, vs. ELIZABETH WHITKOPF and SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, Defendants. / DEFENDANT, SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS’ ANSWER TO SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS by and through the undersigned counsel, for the Answer to the Plaintiff’s Complaint says: 1. Admit for jurisdictional purposes only. 2. Admit. 3. Without sufficient knowledge and, therefore, deny. 4. Admit. 5. Admit. 6. Admit. COUNT I CLAIM OF STEPHANIE STABRYLLA AGAINST Count I, paragraphs 7 through 8 are not di COUNT II CLAIM OF STEPHANIE ST ABRYLLA AGAINST SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS Defendant re-alleges and reasserts its responses to paragraphs 1-8 above. 9. Defendant admits the existence of a policy of automobile insurance which the policy, and that the policy was in effect on the date of the accident alleged in the Complaint. Defendant denies all remaining allegations. 10. Deny. 11. Admit. 12. Without sufficient knowledge and, therefore, deny. 13. Deny. 14. Deny. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 15. Defendant affirmatively alleges that Plai caused by or contributed to by Plaintiff’s own negligence, and therefore, Defendant is entitled to for by F.S. 768.81 and a proportionate reduction or bar to Plaintiffs damages. 16. Defendant affirmatively alleges that at the time of the accident, Plaintiff was unreasonable in failing to use an available and to the proximate cause of 17. Defendant affirmatively alleges that the Plaintiff failed to mi any, and therefore, is not entitled to recovery d have been mitigated. Plaintiff’s failure to mitigate includes: failing to follow the instructions and recommendations of her/his health care providers, failing to seek or maintain comparable full time employment, failing to submit all payable medical bills to his/her health insurer (and instead, executing a letter of protection to his/her medical provider), thus, depriving Defenda available as a third party benefi Frohman, 901 So 2d 830 (Fla. 2005); Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corp v. Lasky, 868 So 2d 547 (4th DCA 2003); Fla. Stat. 641.3154, and by obtaining medi when comparable care was available at reasonable prices had plaintiff made any reasonable inquiry. 18. Defendant affirmatively alleges that Defendant is entitled to the procedures, ida Statutes, Section 627.737, and the Plaintiff’s claims are barred the Florida Motor Vehicle No Fault Act, Florida Statutes Section 627.730 through Section 627.7405 because Plaintiff fails to meet the threshold provisions of said Act outlined in Florida Statutes Section 627.737. Defendant denies that the Plaintiff is entitled to recover by e tort exemption provided by the Statute. 19. Defendant affirmatively alleges that Pl trier of fact for any PIP benefits received, or payable, and any reductions required by Florida 20. Defendant affirmatively alleges that if some or all of Plai payable, Plaintiff is not entitled to duplicate recovery of these amounts or, in the alternative, evidence of collateral source payments should be submitted to the jury. Additionally, Plaintiff is not entitled to recover the amounts of any managed care adjust Plaintiff’s health care providers to Plaintiff’s medical bills, in accordance with billing Plaintiff’s health insurer, (2) Medicaid, (3) Medicare, or (4) any other third-party payor. See, Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corp. v. Lasky, 868 So.2d 547 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Cooperative Leasing, Inc. v. Johnson, 872 So.2d 956 (Fla Nationwide Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 890 So.2d write-offs or adjustments to Plaintiff’s medical bi ealth care providers in accordance with their managed care or other agreements with Plaintiff’s HMO, health insurer, 21. Defendant affirmatively alleges that 22. Defendant affirmatively alleges that certain non-parties, will notify the Plaintiff of the identity and nature of the negligence as soon as practicable. If no non-party fault is identified in di rily withdraw this defense. 23. Defendant affirmatively alleges that pur entitled to a setoff for any payment received from as are sought in this litigation. 24. Defendant affirmatively alleges that Pl nt is entitled to the defenses and limitations provided for by 25. Defendant affirmatively alleges that the Pl conditions precedent to the filing of this action. 26. Defendant affirmatively alleges that it is not liable for any damages that exceed described in Plaintiff’s Complaint. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS trial by jury on all issues so triable. Frank P. Diplacido, III Esq, Morgan & Morgan, Primary E-mail: fdiplacido@forthepeople.com; pneira@forthepe LAW OFFICE OF IGNACIO M. SARMIENTO PO Box 7217 London, KY 40742 Telephone: 305-670-9339 Attorney for Defendant, Safeco Laura W. Johnson, Esq., FBN 113572 Primary E-mail (eservice only): FortMyersLegalMail@libertymutual.com Secondary E-mail: Laura.Johnson02@Libertymutual.com