MIRACLE CHIROPRACTIC REHAB CENTER v. 21ST CENTURY CENTENNIAL INSURANCE COMPANY (2021)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

MIRACLE CHIROPRACTIC & REHAB CENTER a/a/o Samuel Joseph, Appellant, v. 21ST CENTURY CENTENNIAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 4D21-616

Decided: May 12, 2021

Christina M. Kalin and John C. Daly of Daly & Barber, P.A., Plantation for appellant. No appearance filed for appellee.

The provider-assignee appeals from the county court's order granting the insurer's motion to transfer the underlying action's venue from Broward County to Polk County. Because the insurer's motion was not verified or supported by affidavit, the county court erred in granting the motion. See Am. Vehicle Ins. Co. v. Goheagan, 35 So. 3d 1001, 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (“[W]hen a defendant challenges venue by filing an affidavit controverting the plaintiff's venue allegations, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish the propriety of the venue selection.”) (emphasis added). Therefore, we reverse the order on appeal, and remand for the county court to permit the insurer to file a verified motion or affidavit supporting the motion to transfer venue.

Presuming the insurer does so, the burden shall shift to the provider to establish, by evidence, the propriety of its venue selection. See id. If the provider fails to present any such evidence, then the county court shall grant the insurer's motion. See Gino Vitiello, M.D., P.A. v. Genovese Joblove & Battista, P.A., 123 So. 3d 1185, 1188 (Fla 4th DCA 2013) (reversing the circuit court's order denying the defendants’ motion to transfer venue from Broward County to Miami–Dade County, where once the defendants met their initial burden to establish, by affidavit, that venue was proper in Miami–Dade County, the plaintiff failed to file any sworn evidence to establish that venue was proper in Broward County).

However, presuming the provider presents evidence supporting its venue selection, the county court shall hold an evidentiary hearing to resolve any relevant factual disputes and then make a legal decision whether the provider's venue selection is legally supportable. See Fla. Gamco, Inc. v. Fontaine, 68 So. 3d 923, 928 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (“In order to rule on such a motion, the trial court needs to resolve any relevant factual disputes and then make a legal decision whether the plaintiff's venue selection is legally supportable.”).

Reversed and remanded with instructions.

GERBER, J.

Gross and Kuntz, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network