ALTERRA HEALTH CARE CORPORATION, A/K/A ALTERNATIVE LIVING SERVICES, INC., D/B/A STERLING HOUSE OF TALLAHASSEE, AND STERLING HOUSE CORPORATION, D/B/A STERLING HOUSE OF TALLAHASSEE, PETITIONERS,
v.
ESTATE OF FRANCES SHELLEY, BY AND THROUGH MARK S. MITCHELL, EXECUTOR DE SON TORT, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Florida Constitution cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this nursing home negligence case, the defendant, Alterra Health Care Corporation, has filed a petition for writ of certiorari, asserting that the trial court violated the privacy rights of its non-party employees and departed from the essential requirements of law by ordering Al-terra to produce employee personnel files containing confidential information. We are bound by North Florida Reg’l Hosp., Inc. v. Douglas, 454 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), in which we held that an employer does not have standing to raise the privacy rights of its employees. Since, under Douglas, Alterra did not have standing to assert the privacy rights of its non-party employees, the trial court could not have departed from the essential requirements of law. We acknowledge and certify conflict with Beverly Enterprises-Florida, Inc. v. Deutsch, 765 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
Alterra’s petition is denied.
ERVIN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur; WOLF, J., concurs with opinion.
WOLF, J.,
specially concurring.
I concur because we are bound by North Florida Reg’l Hosp., Inc. v. Douglas, 454 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). If this court were able to work with a clean slate, however, I would follow the fifth district in Beverly Enterprises-Florida, Inc. v. Deutsch, 765 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). Innocent employees who are not parties to an action against their employer should not be required to hire a lawyer to protect their interests. It would be better to allow the employer, who is a party to the action and who collected the information, to assert its employees’ privacy rights guaranteed by the Florida Constitution.1
. The existing criteria for granting third party standing to assert a constitutional right are not a barrier in this case. See Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v. United States, 491 U.S. 617, 623 n. 3, 109 S.Ct. 2646, 2651 n. 3, 105 L.Ed.2d 528 (1989); Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190, 193, 97 S.Ct. 451, 455, 50 L.Ed.2d 397 (1976). Although Alterra's employees could potentially intervene, such intervention would be costly and inefficient. In addition, Alterra and its employees have a substantial relationship and consistent interests which favor the granting of third party standing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Alterra Healthcare Corp. v. Est. OF Francis Shelley, 827 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 2002)…LEWIS, J. We have for review Alterra Health Care Corp. v. Estate of Shelley, 779 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), which expressly and directly conflicts with the opinion in Beverly Enterprises-Florida, Inc. v. Deutsch, 765 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. MATERIAL FACTS The executor…
-
SCI Funeral Servs. OF Fla., Inc. v. Light, 811 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…acy interests of the plot owners when the plaintiffs seek to represent the plot owners as a class and whose attorneys apparently already represent a sizeable portion of that class. See generally Alterra Health Care Corp. v. Shelley ex rel. Mitchell, 779 So. 2d 635, 636 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (holding an employer does not have standing to raise the privacy rights of its employees). The plaintiffs and their attorneys clearly opposed the protective order sought by SCI. Finding no departure from the essential requi…
Authorities Cited
- Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (U.S. 1976)
- Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v. United States, 491 U.S. 617 (U.S. 1989)
- Rosalyn Ann Sanders v. State, 765 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- N. Fla. Reg'l Hosp., Inc. v. Douglas, 454 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)