Opinion ID: 1708066
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Must the jury be instructed on the plaintiff's PIP benefits?

Text: The second question asks whether, in cases where the jury is the trier of fact, the jury must be instructed that the plaintiff shall not recover special damages for PIP benefits. Again, the statute answers this question. Section 627.736(3) provides that if special damages are introduced in evidence, the trier of facts, whether judge or jury, shall not award damages for personal injury protection benefits paid or payable. In all cases in which a jury is required to fix damages, the court shall instruct the jury that the plaintiff shall not recover such special damages for personal injury protection benefits paid or payable  (emphasis added). Therefore, based on the plain language of the statute, we answer the second question in the affirmative. The statutory language quoted above implies, of course, that only when the plaintiff introduces evidence of damages that would be covered by PIP benefits must evidence of the PIP benefits be introduced as well. [3] The purpose of the setoff provision in section 627.736(3) is to prevent a plaintiff from obtaining a double recovery, i.e., receiving as damages sums for which PIP benefits were paid. McKenna, 771 So.2d at 558. If no evidence of damages covered by PIP benefits is presented, no danger of double recovery exists. Where the jury hears no such evidence (for example, no evidence of medical expenses resulting from the accident), evidence of PIP benefits generally is not relevant. But see Bogosian v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 817 So.2d 968, 973 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (agreeing with the plaintiff that a collateral source instruction should have been given even though plaintiff had introduced no evidence of the PIP benefits paid because the insurer had introduced the policy, which referred to PIP benefits, and the jury's award indicated it may have made a PIP benefits deduction on its own).