CYPRESS COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND KAREN VERANKO, APPELLANTS,
v.
JOSEPH F. AGNITSCH AND DOROTHEA E. AGNITSCH, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES

Fla. 4th DCA | 1981-02-25
No. 79-1325
MOORE and HERSEY, JJ., concur.
395 So. 2d 1167 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1981)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the admission of medical mediation panel findings into evidence was prejudicial error requiring a new trial because the panel lacked jurisdiction.


Facts & Procedural History

The defendant Hospital appealed a plaintiff's verdict in a medical malpractice case, arguing the trial court improperly admitted the results of a medi…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
BERANEK, Judge.

BERANEK, Judge.

This is an appeal by the defendant Hospital from a plaintiff’s verdict and judgment in a medical malpractice case. On appeal the Hospital asserts the trial court improperly admitted into evidence the results of a medical mediation panel proceeding. The finding of the panel was that the Hospital was guilty of actionable negligence. On appeal it is asserted that the panel’s findings were void because the panel was without jurisdiction. In addition, the Hospital asserts that plaintiff made an improper golden rule argument to the jury.

We reverse based upon the admission into evidence of the medical mediation panel’s finding.1 The defendant continually asserted that this was a situation where the hearing before the medical mediation panel had not commenced within six months from the date the claim was filed. Defendant correctly asserted the panel’s jurisdiction had terminated and the findings of the panel should not have been admitted into evidence. Cohen v. Johnson, 373 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Feinstein v. Brown, 370 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Raedel v. Watson Clinic Foundation, Inc., 360 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). We conclude that the admission of the panel’s findings into evidence constituted prejudicial error which requires a new trial.

As to the second point on appeal, we conclude that no proper objection was made and therefore do not reach this issue.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL.

MOORE and HERSEY, JJ., concur. . The finding of the panel occurred prior to the Supreme Court’s decision in Aldana v. Holub, 381 So. 2d 231 (Fla.1980), which was prospecfive only. Hernandez v. Garwood, 390 So. 2d 357 (Fla.1980).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw