LHERISSON DOMOND, M.D., ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
KELLY A. MILLS, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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.
Health care providers must give notice of participation in the Florida Birth Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan to obstetrical patients prior to delivery as a condition precedent to invoking the plan as an exclusive remedy.
The Fourth District Court of Appeal certified a question regarding whether notice of participation in the Florida Birth Related Neurological Injury Co…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Exclusive Remedy cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Mills v. North Broward Hospital Dist., 664 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), wherein the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified the following question to be of great public importance:
Does § 766.316, Fla. Stat. (1993), require that health care providers give pre-deliv-ery notice to their obstetrical patients of their participation in the Florida Birth Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan as a condition precedent to the providers invoking NICA as the patient’s exclusive remedy?
664 So. 2d at 66. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. In Galen of Florida, Inc. v. Braniff, 696 So. 2d 308 (Fla.1997), we have answered this question by holding “that as a condition precedent to invoking the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan as a patient’s exclusive remedy, health care providers must, when practicable, give their obstetrical patients notice of their participation in the plan a reasonable time prior to delivery.” Id., 696 So. 2d at 309. Accordingly, we answer the certified question as we did in Galen and approve the decision under review to the extent it is consistent with our prior opinion.
It is so ordered.
KOGAN, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur. OVERTON and GRIMES, JJ., dissent.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Weeks v. Florida Birth-Related Neurological, 977 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…cable. Id. at 309-10 (emphasis added); see also Univ. Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Athey, 699 So. 2d 1350, 1350 (Fla.1997) (holding that the notice must be given a “ ‘reasonable time prior to delivery.’ ” (quoting Galen, 696 So. 2d at 309)); Domond v. Mills, 696 So. 2d 314, 315 (Fla.1997) (same); Ortiz, 920 So. 2d at 785 (following a quotation from Galen, the court held, “If the purpose of the notice requirement is to give the patient the choice to choose a NICA protected delivery or not, hospitals should give notice…1 / 2
-
The Bd. OF Regents OF the State OF Fla. v. Athey, 694 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
Authorities Cited
- Galen OF Fla., Inc. v. Braniff, 696 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1997)
- Mills v. N. Broward Hosp. Dist., 664 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)