-
689 So. 2d 1197 District Court of Appeal of Florida March 12, 1997 No. 96-0760
The Third Party Complaint alleges the doctors' negligent treatment of Ruth Gorin's foot, which allowed the injury to become fatal.
The initial tortfeasor is simply trying to recoup his losses that in fairness should be shared with a negligent doctor.
Hwang was a treating physician; that Mrs. Gorin died as a result of Dr. Hwang's negligence; that Benchwarmers completely settled with the estate for the full extent of Mrs. Gorin's injuries, on its own behalf and on behalf of Dr.
-
274 So. 3d 407 District Court of Appeal of Florida June 12, 2019 No. 18-0830
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
-
5 So. 3d 726 District Court of Appeal of Florida February 19, 2009 No. 1D07-6539
Whether the trial court erred in refusing to consider the alleged negligence of the FBOR physicians depends on whether their alleged negligence was necessary to an accurate determination of StarMed’s pro rata share of the “entire liability
The trial court was persuaded by UMC’s arguments that the FBOR physicians’ negligence was irrelevant to the contribution claim because none of the dollars UMC paid in settlement represented the physicians’ liability.
Wilkinson suffered one injury, which resulted from the culmination of the negligence of various caregivers, physician and non-physician alike. Thus, in apportioning fault among all of the tortfeasors who contributed to Mrs.
-
789 So. 2d 1069 District Court of Appeal of Florida June 13, 2001 No. 4D00-3463
Mekras, 679 So.2d 278 (Fla.1996) the reverse situation was presented, in which the plaintiff gave notice to the negligent physician, but not to the employer of the negligent physician.
-
911 So. 2d 277 District Court of Appeal of Florida September 30, 2005 No. 2D04-3002
The Estate did not sue any of the treating physicians for medical negligence. The Respondents filed a "Motion For Order Authorizing Ex Parte Communications With Former Treating Physicians and Health Care Providers."
The medical negligence exception allows a physician to disclose patient information "to attorneys, experts, and other individuals necessary to defend the physician in a medical negligence action in which the physician is or expects
The medical negligence exception permits disclosure only "by a physician who `is or reasonably expects to be named as a defendant' in a medical negligence action." Acosta, 671 So.2d at 156 (quoting § 455.241(2), Fla.
-
649 So. 2d 357 District Court of Appeal of Florida February 9, 1995 No. 94-2524
The issue is whether a hospital charged with liability for the negligence of a physician alleged to be an agent of the hospital may conduct ex parte interviews with that physician without admitting before trial that the physician was
The plaintiff alleged that AGH should be held vicariously liable for their negligent acts and omissions based on an employment or agency relationship between the physicians and the hospital.
The fact that petitioner denied in its answer any employment, agency, or joint venture relationship with the physicians in question should not preclude it from speaking with doctors who are alleged to have committed negligent acts
-
178 So. 2d 135 District Court of Appeal of Florida August 3, 1965 Nos. 64-595, 64-596
Talcott, Fla.App. 1965, 171 So.2d 412 , involving the same doctor. The affidavit did not connect the cause of death to any specific negligence charged to the doctor.
The other ground recited in the opinion, that the affidavit did not connect the cause of death to any specific negligence charged to the doctor, relates to the portion of the affidavit in which the doctor stated that the listed acts
and omissions of the defendant doctor which he had characterized as negligence (combined with negligence of others), proximately caused the death.
-
939 So. 2d 185 District Court of Appeal of Florida October 6, 2006 No. 5D04-3284
of independent contractor physicians.
If the physician is negligent, it reasons, Winter Park Hospital cannot be liable.
The University was unable to escape liability for the negligence of the negligent physician because delegating performance of its contract to the physician did not discharge its contractual duty.
-
693 So. 2d 1055 District Court of Appeal of Florida May 14, 1997 No. 96-0073
Goldschmidt involves a medical malpractice action in which the plaintiff sought to hold one doctor responsible for the negligence of another doctor who was "covering" for him.
First the supreme court held that it was necessary to plead agency to hold the original doctor liable for the negligence of the covering doctor.
Although there was expert opinion evidence in the record that the covering doctor was negligent, the court held that "there was no evidentiary question in this case for the jury to resolve." 571 So.2d at 424 .
-
864 So. 2d 1 District Court of Appeal of Florida February 4, 2004 No. 3D01-1518
Neri, alleging, inter alia, that the doctor had acted negligently in his treatment of Elizabeth and that Carnival should be held vicariously liable for such negligence under theories of agency and apparent agency, and that Carnival
If the carrier breaches its duty, it is responsible for its own negligence. If the doctor is negligent in treating a passenger, however, that negligence will not be imputed to the carrier.
So, too, should it be liable for the negligent treatment of a passenger by a physician or nurse in the normal scope of their employment, as members of the ship's company, subject to the orders and commands of the master.
-
33 So. 3d 117 District Court of Appeal of Florida April 28, 2010 No. 4D08-4293
following his advice and instructions his injuries are aggravated or increased by the negligence, mistake or lack of skill of such physician, the law regards the negligence of the wrongdoer in causing the original injury.
his advice and instructions, and his *121 injuries are thereafter aggravated or increased by the negligence, mistake, or lack of skill of such physician or surgeon, the law regards the negligence of the wrongdoer in causing the original
In that case, which also arose from a car accident, the defendants filed a third-party complaint against the treating physician, alleging that negligent treatment had caused all or part of the plaintiffs injuries. Id. at 704 .
-
85 So. 3d 502 District Court of Appeal of Florida February 22, 2012 No. 4D09-3610
We remanded the case with directions to the trial court to allow the plaintiff to file a third amended complaint specifically identifying the physicians and other employees or agents of the hospital for whose negligence the hospital
The general rule is that a hospital is not liable for the negligent acts of a physician who is not its employee, but an independent contractor. See Shands Teaching Hosp. & Clinic, Inc. v.
The plaintiff also alleged that the hospital was responsible for the negligence of several other physicians, but those allegations are not relevant to this appeal. . The plaintiff has not challenged this ruling on appeal. .
-
385 So. 2d 1038 District Court of Appeal of Florida June 6, 1980 No. MM-430
Thus, at that time, Nancy had actual knowledge of the alleged negligent failure of appellee doctor to diagnose her cancer, and of the metastasis of the cancer to her lymph nodes.
The trial court ruled that as a matter of law whatever cause of action Nancy had against appellee doctor for negligent failure to diagnose breast cancer accrued in March 1973 when the correct diagnosis was made and metastasis to the
At the time the radical mastectomy was performed, she had no cause of action against appellee doctor because there was no evidence that his alleged negligence had resulted in any harm to her.
-
330 So. 2d 71 District Court of Appeal of Florida April 6, 1976 No. 75-723
Helms alleged negligence of Doctor Sims in the performance of a hysterectomy operation. After the taking of extensive discovery, it appeared without genuine issue of material fact that Mrs.
final judgment for Doctor Sims.
Humes, supra , the Supreme Court dealt with a summary judgment for a physician who was allegedly negligent in applying a cast to an infant's arm so that a "pressure sore" resulted, and negligent in failing to heed the classic warnings
-
899 So. 2d 336 District Court of Appeal of Florida March 2, 2005 No. 4D02-2838
In Atienza , the California Court of Appeal concluded that "a physician who induces a patient to enter into sexual relations is liable for professional negligence only if the physician engaged in the sexual conduct on the pretext that
The plaintiff had alleged that the physician negligently performed spinal surgery that left her debilitated.
The plaintiffs *341 later amended their complaint to add claims against the hospital for negligent hiring and retention of the doctors.
-
83 So. 3d 785 District Court of Appeal of Florida November 30, 2011 No. 4D10-3629
Casasnovas’ estate filed suit against Palms West alleging inter alia that the hospital negligently retained physicians who it knew would not treat patients without insurance.
The court dismissed the bulk of respondent’s claims; however, it found that the two claims alleging negligent retention of physicians and the hospital’s duty to assure competent staff members were not medical negligence claims.
The failure of the on-call doctors to respond, which respondent alleges resulted in Casasnovas’ death, sounds in medical negligence, even if the doctors’ motives were purely economic.
-
384 So. 2d 234 District Court of Appeal of Florida May 30, 1980 No. PP-97
If the jury found the doctor negligent in failing to remove the sponge, it could also have found that the negligence of the nurses was, under the circumstances, the proximate cause of the patient's injury since the evidence supported
Zeagler, 157 So. 328 , 116 Fla. 628 (1934), where the patient sued the defendant doctor for negligently failing to remove a sponge following abdominal surgery.
of the doctor, the nurses, or both.
-
792 So. 2d 481 District Court of Appeal of Florida January 24, 2001 Nos. 4D99-2182, 4D99-2529
This appeal stems from a medical malpractice action in which the plaintiff, Joseph Cephas, sued two treating physicians in the same suit and the jury found negligence as to both.
his advice and instructions, and his injuries are thereafter aggravated or increased by the negligence, mistake, or lack of skill of such physician or surgeon, the law regards the negligence of the wrongdoer in causing the original
If the answer to either question was "yes," the jury was then asked to apportion the negligence between the two doctors.
-
172 So. 3d 559 District Court of Appeal of Florida August 19, 2015 No. 3D13-2604
It was not until April 19, 2013, at the hearing on the motion for summary judgment, that the Estate, for the first time argued the University of Miami may be vicariously liable for the negligence of other physicians.
On appeal, the Estate argues it was denied, due process because it was not given an opportunity to present evidence on the University’s vicarious liability for the negligence of other physicians prior to entry of the final summary
Therefore, because the University of Miami’s vicarious liability for the negligence of other physicians was not sufficiently plead, there was no entitlement to additional summary judgment proceedings and no due process violations occurred
-
302 So. 2d 187 District Court of Appeal of Florida September 27, 1974 No. 74-178
in following his advice and instructions, and his injuries are thereafter aggravated or increased by the negligence, mistake, or lack of skill of such physician or surgeon, the law regards the negligence of the wrongdoer in causing
There was nothing he could have done to have prevented the independent negligence of the physician. If Campbell, who is to be liable for the malpractice of Dr.
Herrero filed a cross complaint for indemnity naming the hospital and the doctors as cross defendants contending that his liability would attach by reason only of the negligence of the doctors and the hospital and hence the cross defendants
Showing the top 500 cases. Narrow your search or add filters to see more.