(The information on this site applies to Florida only)

Disclaimer:  What follows are reports of some of the significant medical malpractice cases ruled on by Florida's appellate courts and supreme court for approximately the past year.  These reports include only our brief synopsis about the legal significance of these cases, and you should always obtain and read the entire case opinion to see what else is in the opinion.  You should not attempt formal legal research on our site because we do not have full case databases nor are we able to keep our reports current on a day-to-day basis.  It should be remembered that all cases are fact specific, and even a slight change in the facts could change the outcome of these cases.        

Court upholds enforcement of mandatory binding arbitration clause in nursing home admission contract. Eldridge v. Integrated Health Services, __ So.2d __, 26 FLW D2798 ( Fla. 2nd DCA 11-28-01 ). The plaintiff alleged that the nursing home arbitration clause was unconscionable. In a short, two-paragraph opinion, the appellate court, like the trial court below, found that the plaintiff failed to prove that the contract was procedurally unconscionable, so the question of substantive unconscionability was not reached. 

Nursing home, not nursing home liability insurance carrier, was liable for award of plaintiff’s attorney fees under the plain language of the liability insurance contract. Scottsdale Insurance Company v. Haynes, 793 So.2d 1006 ( Fla. 5th DCA 2001). This was a nursing home liability case under Chapter 400. After plaintiff prevailed, the plaintiff was also awarded attorney’s fees by statute. The nursing home’s insurance carrier claimed that it was not responsible for attorney’s fees because its contract of insurance says it is only obligated to pay whatever sum the insured is legally obligated to pay “as damages because of injury”. The Fifth District Court of Appeal agreed with the insurance carrier that its obligation was only pursuant to the wording in the insurance contract and the word “damages” has a plain meaning that does not ordinarily include costs or attorney’s fees. Motions to certify the issue were granted and the following question was certified to the Florida Supreme Court as one of great public importance: “Can an insured recover reasonable attorney’s fees as “damages” from its liability insurer when the attorney’s fees were awarded to a prevailing plaintiff pursuant to Section 400.429, Florida Statutes, against the insured, and the insurance contract provides the insurer “will pay on behalf of the insured all sums which the insured has become obligated to pay as damages because of the injury to which the insurance applies caused by a medical incident which occurs during the policy period?”

In nursing home case, 4th District orders plaintiff’s counsel to answer interrogatories asking for a list of documents obtained from AHCA surveys and nursing home personnel files which he contends are relevant to the issues in the case, and the manner in which they are relevant. Gardner v. Manor Care, __ So. 2d __, 27 FLW D837 ( Fla. 4th DCA 4-10-02 ). Comment: As pointed out by the dissenting opinion of Judge Stevenson, this ruling clearly invades the mental impressions of plaintiff’s counsel, conflicts with Smith v. Florida Power & Light, 632 So.2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), and violates rule 1.280(b)(3) Fla. R. Civ. P., which states that in ordering discovery of documents and other information “the court shall protect against disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of a party concerning litigation.” 

Order compelling arbitration in nursing home case was remanded for a full evidentiary hearing and further findings by trial court. Blanchard v. Central Park Lodges, 805 So.2d 6 ( Fla. 2d DCA 2001). This nursing home wrongful death case included allegations of negligence, statutory violations, and breach of fiduciary duty. The trial court granted the nursing home’s motion to compel arbitration based on an arbitration clause in the nursing home admission contract. The Second District reversed and remanded, holding:
a). When Plaintiff disputed the authenticity of the copy of the contract attached to defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, the issue of the authenticity of the contract was for the trial court to determine in an evidentiary hearing.
b). Whether the corporate defendant in the case was actually a party to the arbitration agreement (or a 3rd party beneficiary of the agreement) was for the trial court to decide. 
c). Whether the arbitration provision was procedurally or substantively unconscionable was for the trial court to decide.
d). Whether the nursing home admission contract was terminated due to the death of the patient (and therefore not applicable to these claims), was an issue for the arbitrators to decide. 
Trial court order for production of extensive documentation on nursing home employees was quashed. Extendicare v. Johnson, 27 FLW D1628 ( Fla. 2nd DCA 7-17-02 ). The trial court ordered the nursing home to produce documents about its employees including information from other employers, reports from law enforcement or state agencies or abuse reporting agencies, licensing certification information, disciplinary information about the employee, documents submitted by the employee or recorded by the facility concerning complaints by the employee, performance evaluations, and forms, letters, or notes relating to termination of the employee's services. The trial court had overruled the nursing home's claim of "confidentiality" and granted the plaintiff's motion to compel. In reversing the trial court, the Second District Court of Appeal allowed the order compelling production of licensing certifications, but found the trial court abused its discretion by failing to fashion a more narrowly tailored discovery order on the other information which might include things like an in camera inspection of documents in order to safeguard the privacy of the present and former employees.

Fourth District holds that a single fall in a nursing home can constitute a violation of rights under chapter 400, Florida Statutes. Angelo v. Healthcare and Retirement Corporation of America , __ So. 2nd __, 27 FLW D1944 ( Fla. 4th DCA 8-28-02 ). The trial court granted summary judgment for defendant holding as a matter of law that a single fall in a nursing home was inadequate to state a cause of action for violation of the right to receive adequate and appropriate health care as delineated in Section 400.022, Florida Statutes. The trial court ruled that Plaintiff's only remedy for a single fall incident would be a claim for medical malpractice, basing its decision on some of the legislative history from Chapter 400, and from two New York cases which construed that state's nursing home law. In reversing the trial court the Fourth District Court of Appeal stated that it is improper to resort to legislative history when the plain wording of the statute is sufficiently clear. The court stated there is nothing in section 400.023 that requires multiple incidents before the remedy becomes available, and furthermore, the statute states that its remedies are in addition to and cumulative with other legal and administrative remedies.