The patient’s sole claim against the doctor was for medical negligence. The doctor asserted an affirmative defense of informed consent.

Over objection, the trial court instructed the jury as to both general negligence and informed consent. The jury found the doctor negligent, and the patient was awarded $15,591,619.00 in damages. This appeal followed.

The informed consent instruction contributed to the jury’s finding the doctor negligent because it allowed the jury to find the doctor negligent even if the jury found that the doctor’s decision not to administer Cytoxan fell within

The defendant physician and his medical practice (collectively “the physician”) appeal from a jury verdict finding that the physician’s negligent supervision of an advanced registered nurse practitioner (“ARNP”) caused the death of

The patient’s estate later sued the physician, the ARNP, and the detox facility. The estate’s claim against the physician ultimately was pled as a claim for negligent supervision of the ARNP.

In our opinion, although the argument cuts both ways, a reasonable juror may have considered whether the physician was present or absent when the patient was admitted as tending to prove or disprove whether the physician negligently

The plaintiff sued the doctor, the cardiac surgeon, and their respective hospitals for the alleged negligence in not prescribing an anticoagulant medication. 3 • The Partial Summary Judgment and Trial In his answer, the doctor

When a plaintiff has been treated by successive physicians and at some point during the course of treatment has sustained a single injury, absent the proof that the negligence, if any, of the initial tortfeasor was the proximate

This is not a case where the cardiac surgeon’s alleged negligence was different than that of the doctor.

“independent duty to select and retain competent independent physicians seeking staff privileges”; the hospital will be “responsible for the negligence of an independent physician when it has failed to exercise due care in the selection

Vernia, Annotation, Tort Claim for Negligent Credentialing of Physician, 98 A.L.R.5th 533 (2002) (gathering authorities). 2 alleging that PDSC’s negligent credentialing of Dr. Regala and Dr.

for its own negligent grant of staff privileges to those doctors.

The defendant physician and his medical practice (collectively “the physician”) appeal from: (1) a jury verdict finding that the physician’s negligent supervision of an advanced registered nurse practitioner (“ARNP”) caused the death

The patient’s estate later sued the physician, the ARNP, and the detox facility. The estate’s claim against the physician ultimately was pled as a claim for negligent supervision of the ARNP.

In our opinion, although the argument cuts both ways, a reasonable juror may have considered whether the physician was present or absent when the patient 5 was admitted as tending to prove or disprove whether the physician negligently

A subsequent treating physician simply may not be present at the time a defendant physician makes an allegedly negligent decision or engages in a potentially negligent act.

We hold that a physician cannot insulate himself or herself from liability for negligence by 7 This case can thus be distinguished from Santa Lucia v.

Albanes were each negligent and that the negligence of each was a legal cause of Mrs.

Count I alleged medical negligence solely against the treating physician, Dr. Patel.

The plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the hospital negligently granted privileges to a physician it knew or should have known was incompetent or unqualified.

In Tomas, the plaintiff submitted a presuit affidavit pertinent to its medical negligence claims against the treating doctor and a negligent credentialing claim against the hospital.

Procedural History After a family member’s death during hospitalization, the appellee personal representative filed a medical negligence action against five physicians, including appellant Dr.

The decision found two of the physicians—Dr. Regan and Dr. Tamar—were negligent, and both were Lawnwood’s agents. The decision found two other physicians were not negligent.

At trial, a jury will determine the negligence, if any, of the doctors in this case, and the vicarious liability, if any, of their employers. The [a]rbitrator assigned a percentage of fault to Drs.

Lifemark Hosp. of Fla., Inc., 608 So. 2d 855, 857 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (holding that claims against hospital were governed by medical malpractice statute where claims arose out of negligent medical treatment by doctors, which were

. 5 We note that the Estate, in its second amended complaint, identifies alleged negligent care of Ms.

Doctors Hospital of Lake Worth, Inc., 415 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), involved potential hospital liability for the alleged negligence of an emergency room physician.

In Newbold-Ferguson, the plaintiff personal representative of an estate sought to amend her complaint to allege the liability of the hospital for the negligent acts and omissions of an emergency room physician. Id. at 503 .

Here, the patient provided an expert opinion that created a genuine issue of material fact concerning the doctor’s negligence.

The patient’s expert opined the doctor failed to: • obtain a complete history of the patient’s eye; • undertake “a complete and proper pre-surgery examination;” and • attain an ophthalmology consult concerning the patient’s complications

She subsequently filed suit in Broward County against Provider and Doctor for medical negligence, and against Provider for vicarious liability.

The trial court ruled that the proffered evidence showed the doctors and other health care providers were grossly negligent by—contrary to the emergency room physician’s recommendation—placing the decedent on a floor level with fewer

Cape Canaveral Hosp. 426 So. 2d 64, 65 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983) (affirming summary denial of punitive damages because the record lacked basis to conclude doctor or hospital was grossly negligent or acted with malice or fraud).

Under the theory of Appellee, and the appellant in Bohannon, every nurse or doctor, or any other person, that was aware of medical negligence which could somehow be equated with abuse or neglect under chapter 415, commits a crime,

Burns, 83 So. 3d 785, 788 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (where a request 12 was made for help from a GI doctor, the on-call doctors’ failure to respond stated medical negligence); South Miami Hosp., Inc. v.

or absolve the negligence of the original physician: In Florida, an initial tortfeasor “may be held responsible for all subsequent injuries including those caused by medical negligence.”

Neither arose in the context of medical negligence, but both provide helpful parameters for future physician disciplinary cases. 6 Boedy involved a physician, but his Fifth Amendment claim was a right to refuse to submit to any

Simply put, an administrative complaint of medical negligence against a physician who chooses to exercise a Fifth Amendment privilege cannot support discipline without adequate supporting evidence of the claimed misconduct; the physician

However, the defendants denied those paragraphs because the doctor maintained he was not negligent in performing the surgery.

The doctor believed the source of plaintiff’s symptoms were the multiple strictures in the small bowel and not the stricture located at the ileocolonic anastomosis. This is a position the doctor was entitled to maintain.

Here, the doctor did not admit negligence, and, therefore, “medical judgment” could not have been an affirmative defense. See Mancinelli v. Davis, 217 So. 3d 1034, 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).

Latoya Bean, on behalf of herself and her son, sued the university and Bean’s doctors for medical negligence.

Florida courts have ruled the immunity statute constitutional when applied to a physician who, within the scope of his governmental employment, negligently caused injury to another. 474 So. 2d at 244 .

of his governmental employment, negligently caused injury to another.”).

Generally, a hospital will not be liable for the negligence of a physician working in the hospital as an independent contractor or where the independent physician is merely granted staff privileges.

The lawsuit alleged the Defendant Doctors were negligent in failing to timely refer Mrs. Metzler for a chest CT scan, a delay which deprived Mrs. Metzler of a chance to have life-saving surgery.

There, the plaintiffs sued a hospital alleging negligent credentialing of a physician. Id. at 1091 . The court affirmed dismissal based on a deficient section 766.203(2) affidavit. Id. at 1093–94.