The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XLV
TORTS

Chapter 766
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE AND RELATED MATTERS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 766.212

766.212 Appeal of arbitration awards and allocations of financial responsibility.—

(1) An arbitration award and an allocation of financial responsibility are final agency action for purposes of s. 120.68. Any appeal shall be taken to the district court of appeal for the district in which the arbitration took place, shall be limited to review of the record, and shall otherwise proceed in accordance with s. 120.68. The amount of an arbitration award or an order allocating financial responsibility, the evidence in support of either, and the procedure by which either is determined are subject to judicial scrutiny only in a proceeding instituted pursuant to this subsection.

(2) No appeal shall operate to stay an arbitration award; nor shall any arbitration panel, arbitration panel member, or circuit court stay an arbitration award. The district court of appeal may order a stay to prevent manifest injustice, but no court shall abrogate the provisions of s. 766.211(2).

(3) Any party to an arbitration proceeding may enforce an arbitration award or an allocation of financial responsibility by filing a petition in the circuit court for the circuit in which the arbitration took place. A petition may not be granted unless the time for appeal has expired. If an appeal has been taken, a petition may not be granted with respect to an arbitration award or an allocation of financial responsibility that has been stayed.

(4) If the petitioner establishes the authenticity of the arbitration award or of the allocation of financial responsibility, shows that the time for appeal has expired, and demonstrates that no stay is in place, the court shall enter such orders and judgments as are required to carry out the terms of the arbitration award or allocation of financial responsibility. Such orders are enforceable by the contempt powers of the court; and execution will issue, upon the request of a party, for such judgments.

History.—s. 59, ch. 88-1; s. 35, ch. 88-277.

F.S. 766.212 on Google Scholar

F.S. 766.212 on Casetext

Amendments to 766.212

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 766.212

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 766.212.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

L. MORRIS, v. S. MUNIZ, M. D., 252 So. 3d 1143 (Fla. 2018)

. . . malpractice litigation "does not comply with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766.201 - 766.212 . . .

PLANTATION GENERAL HOSPITAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, d b a v. DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS A. B. a, 243 So. 3d 985 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . constitutes final agency action, and any appeal is governed by section 120.68, as provided in section 766.212 . . . only place "manifest injustice" appears in the Medical Malpractice Arbitration statute is in section 766.212 . . . manifest injustice language but in discussing a stay of the arbitration award, thus applying section 766.212 . . .

PP TRANSITION, LP f k a LP d b a v. MUNSON,, 232 So. 3d 515 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . whether the opposing party complied with the reasonable investigation requirements of sections 766.201 to 766.212 . . .

HERNANDEZ, M. D. v. CRESPO,, 211 So. 3d 19 (Fla. 2016)

. . . . § 766.212(1), Fla. Stat, (1988). . § 766.207, Fla. Stat. . . . Stat. . § 766.212(1), Fla. Stat. . . .

BERY, v. FAHEL, D. O., 194 So. 3d 1099 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . mailed by the claimant does not comply with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766.201-766.212 . . .

FRANKS, v. BOWERS, M. D., 116 So. 3d 1240 (Fla. 2013)

. . . provides, in relevant part: (1) Voluntary binding arbitration pursuant to this section and ss.766.208-766.212 . . .

ESTRADA v. MERCY HOSPITAL, INC. P. A. M. D., 121 So. 3d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . See § 766.212(1), Fla. Stat. (2012); § 120.68, Fla. Stat. (2012). II. . . . See § 766.212(1), Fla. Stat. (2012). . . .

LAKELAND REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, a v. PILGRIM, a, 107 So. 3d 505 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . As used in sections 766.201 through 766.212, " '[m]edical negligence’ means medical malpractice, whether . . .

BERRY D. v. PADDEN, M. D., 84 So. 3d 1145 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . by the claimant is not in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766.201-766.212 . . .

C. STAPLES, v. E. DUERR, M. D. P. A. a, 76 So. 3d 1114 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . the claimant is not in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of sections 766.201-766.212 . . .

TELLAM, D. P. M. v. S. MUMFORD, 69 So. 3d 1096 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . initiate litigation was in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirement of sections 766.201-766.212 . . . of intent to sue ... is “in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss 766.201-766.212 . . .

DENO D. Co- S. v. LIFEMARK HOSPITAL OF FLORIDA, INC. d b a M. D. P. A., 45 So. 3d 959 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . . § 766.212(1), Fla. Stat. (2008). The Estate has appealed. We agree with the arbitration panel. . . .

HOLDEN, v. BOBER, M. D. Gu, M. D. W. M. D. P. A. d b a d b a, 39 So. 3d 396 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . dismiss for failing to comply with the reasonable investigation requirements of sections 766.201 to 766.212 . . . whether the opposing party complied with the reasonable investigation requirements of sections 766.201 to 766.212 . . . whether the claimant complies with the reasonable investigation requirements of sections 766.201 to 766.212 . . .

MARTIN MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER, INC. v. HERBER,, 984 So. 2d 661 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . of intent to sue ... is ‘in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss 766.201-766.212 . . .

BDO SEIDMAN, LLP, v. BANCO ESPIRITO SANTO INTERNATIONAL, LTD. ESB S. A., 998 So. 2d 1 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Mary’s contention that subsection 766.212(2) of the Florida Statutes, which limits the ability of a medical . . .

RUSSO ASSOCIATES, INC. v. CITY OF DANIA BEACH CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD,, 920 So. 2d 716 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . So.2d 283 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), in dealing with Florida’s Medical Malpractice Act, sections 766.201-766.212 . . .

LARGIE v. GREGORIAN, M. D. M. D. P. A. A. R. N. P. C. M. D. M. D. P. A., 913 So. 2d 635 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . intent not in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of sections 766.201 through 766.212 . . .

APOSTOLICO, v. ORLANDO REGIONAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, INC., 871 So. 2d 283 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Section 766.202(5), Florida Statutes (2002), provides that ‘‘[a]s used in ss. 766.201-766.212, the term . . .

BARLOW, v. NORTH OKALOOSA MEDICAL CENTER,, 877 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2004)

. . . ANALYSIS The Medical Malpractice Act, sections 766.201 through 766.212, Florida Statutes (2002), was . . . Doig, 842 So.2d 106 (Fla.2003), "Medical Malpractice Act” refers to sections 766.201 through 766.212, . . .

CHESTER, v. DOIG, M. D., 842 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 2003)

. . . See §§ 766.207-766.212, Fla. Stat. (1997). . . .

INTEGRATED HEALTH CARE SERVICES, INC. v. LANG- REDWAY,, 840 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 2002)

. . . complete, the parties may elect to enter voluntary binding arbitration pursuant to sections 766.207-766.212 . . .

BARLOW, v. NORTH OKALOOSA MEDICAL CENTER,, 809 So. 2d 71 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Social security retirement benefits are not collateral sources within the meaning of sections 766.201-766.212 . . .

ST. MARY S HOSPITAL, INC. v. PHILLIPE, v. St. s M. D. v. E. E. v. M. D., 769 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 2000)

. . . an unframed question of great public importance regarding whether the express provisions of section 766.212 . . . Section 766.212(2) limits the ability of a medical malpractice defendant to stay an arbitration award . . . The district court certified to this Court the question of the constitutionality of section 766.212(2 . . . The first issue involves the certified question of whether the express provisions in section 766.212( . . . To that end, sections 766.211 and 766.212 provide as follows: 766.211. . . .

O SHEA, O v Dr. PHILLIPS, M. D. a, 746 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Sections 766.201-766.212, Florida Statutes (1997), concern presuit investigation and arbitration of “ . . .

PARANZINO, v. BERGER, M. D., 755 So. 2d 655 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . by the claimant is not in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766.201-766.212 . . . rejecting the claim is “in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766-201-766.212 . . .

MIZRAHI Co- v. NORTH MIAMI MEDICAL CENTER, LTD. d b a EMSA M. D. M. D. B. M. D. M. D. P. A. M. D. M. D. P. A. M. D. P. A., 712 So. 2d 826 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . Sections 766.201 through 766.212, Florida Statutes. . . .

R. PAGAN, M. D. R. M. D. P. A. v. SMITH, 705 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . Associates in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 619 So.2d 482, 484 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (sections 766.201 through 766.212 . . .

ST. MARY S HOSPITAL, INC. s v. PHILLIPE,, 699 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . See §§ 766.207 and 766.212(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). A motion panel of this court denied the motion. . . . In reviewing the claimed error from the denial of the stay, we turn first to section 766.212. . . . Therefore, our review of this case should follow section 766.212. . . . We again refer to section 766.212(1). . . . See § 766.212, Fla. Stat. (1995), which provides that: "766.212. . . .

COMMUNITY BLOOD CENTERS OF SOUTH FLORIDA, INC. f k a v. DAMIANO,, 697 So. 2d 948 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . sent only after plaintiff complies with the “reasonable investigation requirements of .ss. 766.201-766.212 . . .

KURZWEIL B. v. LARKIN HOSPITAL OPERATING CO. a, 684 So. 2d 901 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . litigation is not in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of sections 766.201-766.212 . . . by the claimant is not in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766.201-766.212 . . .

KUKRAL v. D. MEKRAS, M. D. Dr. T. d b a, 679 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 1996)

. . . Obstetrics & Gynecology, 619 So.2d 482, 484 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (asserting that sections 766.201 through 766.212 . . . by the claimant is not in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766.201-766.212 . . .

FABER v. Dr. C. WROBEL, M. D. In P. A. a Dr. M. D. M. M. D. P. A. a M. M. D., 673 So. 2d 871 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . of intent was not in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of sections 766.201-766.212 . . . by the claimant is not in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766.201-766.212 . . .

MOGLER, v. FRANZEN, M. D. M. D. P. A., 669 So. 2d 269 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . arbitration award under the Medical Malpractice Act is subject to judicial review pursuant to sections 766.212 . . .

SOVA DRUGS, INC. v. BARNES,, 661 So. 2d 393 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . investigation and notice requirements of the Medical Malpractice Reform Act, sections 766.101 through 766.212 . . .

TALLAHASSEE MEMORIAL REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, INC. C. M. D. v. E. KINSEY, Jr., 655 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Those provisions were subsequently codified as sections 766.207 through 766.212, Florida Statutes (1993 . . . 766.106, or to the intended interplay, if any, between section 766,106 and sections 766.207 through 766.212 . . . To the extent relevant, sections 766.207 through 766.212, Florida Statutes (1993), read: 766.207 Voluntary . . . the parties from relying, on appeal, on the arbitration scheme set out in sections 766.207 through 766.212 . . . Finally, it is the only explanation for section 766.212(1), which states that an arbitration award is . . .

MALDONADO, v. EMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, 645 So. 2d 86 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Section 766.202(5) provides that “[a]s used in ss. 766.201-766.212, the term ‘medical expert’ means a . . .

WILKINSON, v. E. GOLDEN, Jr. D. D. S., 630 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . In 1988, the Florida Legislature adopted sections 766.201 through 766.212, Florida Statutes (Supp.1988 . . .

N. WOLFSEN, v. W. APPLEGATE, M. D. R. M. D. J. M. D., 619 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . rejecting the claim is “in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766.201-766.212 . . .

RAGOONANAN, a By RAGOONANAN E. E. v. ASSOCIATES IN OBSTETRICS GYNECOLOGY K. K. M. D. F. II, M. D. P. M. D. M. D. d b a, 619 So. 2d 482 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . The intent of sections 766.201 through 766.212, Florida Statutes (1989), setting forth presuit requirements . . .

M. DUFFY, M. D. v. BROOKER,, 614 So. 2d 539 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . rejecting the claim is “in compliance with the reasonable investigation requirements of ss. 766.201-766.212 . . .

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI, d b a a v. ECHARTE, a ECHARTE, 585 So. 2d 293 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . .— (1) Voluntary binding arbitration pursuant to this section and ss. 766.208-766.212 shall not apply . . . promulgate rules to effect the orderly and efficient processing of the arbitration procedures of ss. 766.201-766.212 . . .