Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...cannot be made responsible for his care and supervision as ordered by the trial court. In this situation, the county in which Amaya was arrested may ultimately be responsible for paying the cost of treatment as long as Amaya remains in custody. See § 901.35(2)(a), Fla....

...by direct appeal after final judgment. For these reasons, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari, quash the order under review, and direct the trial court to make a determination of the proper party responsible for the cost of transportation. Section 901.35, Florida Statutes (1995), sets forth the order of priority a provider of medical care, treatment, hospitalization, or transportation should follow in seeking reimbursement for those services provided to a prisoner. According to the statute, a service provider should look first to an insurance company, then to the person receiving the service, and finally to any financial settlement payable to the injured party. See § 901.35(1)(a), (b), (c), Fla.Stat....

...llows: (a) From the general fund of the county in which the person is arrested, if the arrest was for violation of a state law or county ordinance; or (b) From the municipal general fund, if the arrest was for violation of a municipal ordinance. See § 901.35(2)(a), (b), Fla.Stat....

...Conceding that it is obliged to provide medical treatment to its prisoners, Dade County contends, as it did below, that this obligation does not extinguish the prisoner's primary responsibility to pay for the cost of the treatment under a long-standing common law rule recently codified in Section 901.35, Florida Statutes (1983)....

...Apparently believing — erroneously, in our view — that the court in City of Plantation v. Humana, Inc . had relieved the city of responsibility to pay for the medical care of an indigent in its custody, [8] the Legislature promptly sought to "correct" Plantation by enacting Section 901.35 Florida Statutes (1983). [9] But motive aside, it is clear that the Legislature's intent in passing Section 901.35 was to give express authority to hospitals and governmental agencies to do what they were entitled to do before Plantation (and, in our view, even after Plantation ). Thus, both before and after the enactment of Section 901.35, proof of the prisoner's inability to pay was and is a requisite for the imposition of liability on a governmental entity for the medical care of a prisoner....

...t only with the common law proposition that the governmental body's duty to pay for a prisoner's medical care does *1176 not arise until it is first shown that the prisoner is unable to do so, but also with the edification of the common law found in Section 901.35, Florida Statutes (1983)....

...mittee on Corrections, Probation & Parole (May 10, 1983); and Hearing on CS/HB 830 Before the Florida House Committee on Corrections, Probation & Parole (May 10, 1983) (tapes available from the Florida State Archives; series 414, box 350), show that Section 901.35 was enacted to "correct" the result in Plantation, which was viewed as contrary to previously existing law....

...or the prisoner's needed medical care, we are not here concerned with a dispute between entities. Our sole concern is whether any governmental entity should be responsible to pay for the medical care of a prisoner who is able to pay for his own. [9] Section 901.35, Florida Statutes, provides: "(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the responsibility for paying the expenses of medical care, treatment, hospitalization, and transportation for any person ill, wounded, or otherwise injured...

..."(3) An arrested person who has health insurance, subscribes to a health care corporation, or receives health care benefits from any other source shall assign such benefits to the health care provider." [10] The Fort Myers court notes that the result it reaches is consistent with that part of Section 901.35 allocating financial responsibility to the county or city depending on the charge against the defendant. Ironically, the court makes no mention of the fact that the result it reaches — that the governmental body has the burden to show the prisoner's ability to pay — is completely inconsistent with Section 901.35. [11] Hospital Board of Directors v. Durkis, 426 So.2d 50, upon which the court relies in Fort Myers, is, as we have already said, a case that does not address whether the prisoner was indigent or non-indigent. [12] There is no conflict between Section 901.35 and Section 951.032, Florida Statutes (1983), and Section 951.032 lends no support to the holding in Fort Myers....

...g reimbursement under paragraph (1)(b) for expenses incurred by the facility for the prisoner. A prisoner who willfully refuses to cooperate with the reimbursement efforts of the detention facility may not receive gaintime as provided by s. 951.21." Section 901.35 contemplates that the health care provider has not been paid and fixes the order in which the provider is to seek payment....

...on appeal considering the non-party status of these petitioners. See HRS v. Myers . We next determine whether the petitioners were able to demonstrate that the court departed from the essential requirements of law. We begin our analysis by reviewing section 901.35, Florida Statutes, which provides in part as follows: (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the responsibility for paying the expenses of medical care, treatment, hospitalization, and transportation for any person ill, wounde...

...on of Myers' medical care. If funds were not available from an (a) insurance company, (b) Myers, or (c) a financial settlement, then this section mandates that Broward would be responsible for payment from its general fund. *866 After an analysis of section 901.35, Florida Statutes, we next turn to section 951.032, Florida Statutes, which we find to be instructive: 951.032 FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES (1) A county detention facility or municipal detention facility incurring expe...

...A prisoner who willfully refuses to cooperate with the reimbursement efforts of the detention facility may have a lien placed against the prisoner's cash account or other personal property and may not receive gain-time as provided by section 951.21. We find section 901.35, Florida Statutes to be in harmony with section 951.032 Florida Statutes and in support of HRS and Cochran's position that they should not be responsible for payment of Myers' medical care....

...Appellant's counsel argued vigorously in opposition to requiring appellant to pay restitution for medical care as a condition of probation. The assistant state attorney advised the trial court that the county was entitled to seek such payment as a cost, pursuant to section 901.35, Florida Statutes (1991)....

...The county, as custodian of a prisoner charged with violating a state law or county ordinance, has a duty to provide medical care for its prisoner. See Metropolitan Dade County v. P.L. Dodge Foundations, Inc., 509 So.2d 1170, 1173 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Section 901.35 evinces legislative intent to impose liability for such care on a governmental entity, upon proof of the prisoner's inability to pay....

...anor. We strike the remainder. See Reyes, 655 So.2d at 117. Finally, the trial court assessed $368 for medical expenses incurred while Morran was in custody. We strike this assessment. Although a county may seek reimbursement for medical costs under section 901.35 or section 951.032, these statutes do not authorize the trial court to impose these costs as a condition of probation....

...on appeal considering the non-party status of these petitioners. See HRS v. Myers. We next determine whether the petitioners were able to demonstrate that the court departed from the essential requirements of law. We begin our analysis by reviewing section 901.35, Florida Statutes, which provides in part as follows: (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the responsibility for paying the expenses of medical care, treatment, hospitalization, and transportation for any person ill, wounde...

...of Myers’ medical care. If funds were not available from an (a) insurance company, (b) Myers, or (c) a financial settlement, then this section mandates that Broward would be responsible for payment from its general fund. *866 After an analysis of section 901.35, Florida Statutes, we next turn to section 951.032, Florida Statutes, which we find to be instructive: 951.032 FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES (1) A county detention facility or municipal detention facility incurring expe...

...A prisoner who willfully refuses to cooperate with the reimbursement efforts of the detention facility may have a lien placed against the prisoner’s cash account or other personal property and may not receive gain-time as provided by section 951.21. We find section 901.35, Florida Statutes to be in harmony with section 951.032 Florida Statutes and in support of HRS and Cochran’s position that they should not be responsible for payment of Myers’ medical care....

...Conceding that it is obliged to provide medical treatment to its prisoners, Dade County contends, as it did below, that this obligation does not extinguish the prisoner’s primary responsibility to pay for the cost of the treatment under a long-standing common law rule recently codified in Section 901.35, Florida Statutes (1983)....

...Apparently believing — erroneously, in our view — that the court in City of Plantation v. Humana, Inc. had relieved the city of responsibility to pay for the medical care of an indigent in its custody, 8 the Legislature promptly sought to “correct” Plantation by enacting Section 901.35 Florida Statutes (1983). 9 But motive aside, it is clear that the Legislature’s intent in passing Section 901.35 was to give express authority to hospitals and governmental agencies to do what they were entitled to do before Plantation (and, in our view, even after Plantation). Thus, both before and after the enactment of Section 901.35, proof of the prisoner’s inability to pay was and is a requisite for the imposition of liability on a governmental entity for the medical care of a prisoner....

...ly with the common law proposition that the governmental body’s duty to pay for a prisoner’s medical care does *1176 not arise until it is first shown that the prisoner is unable to do so, but also with the edification of the common law found in Section 901.35, Florida Statutes (1983)....

...n Corrections, Probation & Parole (May 10, 1983); and Hearing on CS/HB 830 Before the Florida House Committee on Corrections, Probation & Parole (May 10, 1983) (tapes available from the Florida State Archives; series 414, box 350), show that Section 901.35 was enacted to "correct” the result in Plantation, which was viewed as contrary to previously existing law....

...for the prisoner's needed medical care, we are not here concerned with a dispute between entities. Our sole concern is whether any governmental entity should be responsible to pay for the medical care of a prisoner who is able to pay for his own. . Section 901.35, Florida Statutes, provides: “(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the responsibility for paying the expenses of medical care, treatment, hospitalization, and transportation for any person ill, wounded, or otherwise injure...

..."(3) An arrested person who has health insurance, subscribes to a health care corporation, or receives health care benefits from any other source shall assign such benefits to the health care provider.” . The Fort Myers court notes that the result it reaches is consistent with that part of Section 901.35 allocating financial responsibility to the county or city depending on the charge against the defendant. Ironically, the court makes no mention of the fact that the result it reaches— that the governmental body has the burden to show the prisoner’s ability to pay — is completely inconsistent with Section 901.35. . Hospital Board of Directors v. Durkis, 426 So.2d 50 , upon which the court relies in Fort Myers, is, as we have already said, a case that does not address whether the prisoner was indigent or non-indigent. . There is no conflict between Section 901.35 and Section 951.032, Florida Statutes (1983), and Section 951.032 lends no support to the holding in Fort Myers....

...eimbursement under paragraph (l)(b) for expenses incurred by the facility for the prisoner. A prisoner who willfully refuses to cooperate with the reimbursement efforts of the detention facility may not receive gain-time as provided by s. 951.21.” Section 901.35 contemplates that the health care provider has not been paid and fixes the order in which the provider is to seek payment....

...Section 901.29 , F.S., authorizes the law enforcement officer making an arrest to take the arrested person to a medical facility for such care as is appropriate. The person receiving the medical care, however, is primarily responsible for paying the expenses of receiving such care. 5 Section 901.35 , F.S., lists by priority who is responsible for the payment of medical care provided to arrested persons in need of medical attention. In the event reimbursement is not available from the sources enumerated in s. 901.35 (1), F.S., the general fund of the county or the city in which the person was arrested will be used for the payment of the medical costs incurred while the person is in custody....

...al care prior to being admitted to the facility. 1 See , Rule 33-8.007, F.A.C. 2 See , Rule 33-8.007(3), F.A.C. 3 See , AGO's 72-346, 75-35 and 75-194. 4 Hospital Board of Directors of Lee County v. Durkis, 426 So.2d 50 , 51 (2 D.C.A. Fla., 1982). 5 Section 901.35 , F.S....

...State, 622 So.2d 624, 625 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the order and judgment for restitution. Our reversal is without prejudice to the Pinellas County Sheriff's right to seek reimbursement for the medical expenses at issue under either section 901.35, Florida Statutes (2005), or section 951.032, Florida Statutes (2005)....

Mr. Joseph L. Passiatore County Attorney County of Charlotte 18500 Murdock Circle Port Charlotte, Florida 33948-1094 Dear Mr. Passiatore: This is in response to your request for an opinion on substantially the following question: DOES s 901.35 , F.S., REQUIRE THE COUNTY TO PAY ONLY FOR INJURIES OR ILLNESSES OR ARRESTEES WHICH ARISE FROM AND ARE DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ARREST? In 1983, the Legislature enacted Ch. 83-189, Laws of Florida, pertaining to the financial responsibility for medical expenses incurred for providing medical care, treatment, hospitalization and transportation of arrested persons. Section 1 of that law created s 901.35 , F.S., which provides: (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the responsibility for paying the expenses of medical care, treatment, hospitalization, and transportation for any person ill, wounded, or otherwise injured during or at t...

...reimbursement for preexisting illnesses or medical problems which are not in any way exacerbated or activated by the circumstances of arrest but which require treatment during the arrestee's period of incarceration in the county detention facility. Section 901.35 , F.S., provides a three step procedure for the reimbursement of medical expenses....

...ation or other source. If those sources are not available, then reimbursement is to be sought from the person receiving the medical care, treatment, hospitalization or transportation. Finally, upon a showing that the above sources are unavailable, s 901.35 (2)(a) places tertiary financial responsibility upon the general fund of the county for the medical expenses of any person who was ill, wounded or otherwise injured during or at the time of arrest for any violation of a state law or county ordinance. Cf., s 901.35 (2)(b), F.S., placing such tertiary financial responsibility upon the general fund of a municipality for violations of municipal ordinances....

...l treatment for county prisoners in need of such services, "it follows that the expense of such treatment would be a legal expense of the sheriff's office for which funds should be budgeted along with other funds budgeted for the care of prisoners." Section 901.35 , F.S., seeks to reapportion the responsibility for some of those costs....

...arrest is placed on the general fund of the county in which the person was arrested rather than on the sheriff's office, provided the arrest was for a violation of a state law or county ordinance and the other sources of reimbursement set forth in s 901.35 are unavailable. To the extent that the provisions of s 901.35 are inapplicable, it appears that the sheriff would continue to be responsible for the medical expenses of prisoners in his custody and that such expenses as a legal expense of his office would be payable from his budget....

...insurance company, health care corporation or other source if the prisoner is covered by an insurance policy or subscribes to a health care corporation or other source for these expenses. The liability placed upon the general fund of the county by s 901.35 , F.S., is restricted to those expenses incurred for medical care, treatment, hospitalization and transportation of persons "ill, wounded, or otherwise injured during or at the time of arrest." You inquire whether the foregoing language limits the liability of the county general fund to injuries or illnesses which arise from or are directly attributable to the arrest itself. Section 901.35 does not appear to so limit the county general fund's liability and in the absence of any evidence of legislative intent to the contrary, this office cannot read such a limitation or restriction into the statute. Instead s 901.35 seems to impose tertiary responsibility on the general fund for any medical expenses incurred for the treatment of persons ill or injured at the time of arrest, regardless of whether the person's condition arises from or is attributable to the circumstances of the arrest....

...eral fund of the county, regardless of whether the illness or injuries arose from or were directly attributable to the circumstances of the arrest. See, Tapes 2 3, Corrections, Probation and Parole Committee, supra. Additionally, subsection (2) of s 901.35 provides that the responsibility for payment of such medical costs exists until such time as an arrested person is released from the custody of the arresting agency....

...the arrest but during the period of detention, any such dispute involves mixed questions of law and fact which this office cannot resolve. It is therefore my opinion, unless judicially or legislatively determined otherwise, that the provisions of s 901.35 , F.S., requiring the general fund of the county in which the arrest was made to reimburse the provider of medical care, treatment, hospitalization, and transportation for any persons ill, wounded or otherwise injured during or at the time of...

...ion form. Although this issue is disputed by Brevard County, Parrish reports that a Brevard County Sheriffs deputy transported Mitchell back to jail after his medical stay. Parrish supports its entitlement to payment from Brevard County by citing to section 901.35, Florida Statutes, which provides: 901.35 Financial responsibility for medical expenses.— (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the responsibility for paying the expenses of medical care, treatment, hospitalization, and transportation for any person ill, wounded, or otherw...

...The furlough order required Mitchell’s return to jail after the medical treatment at Parrish. 6. Although disputed, Mitchell was most likely transported from Parrish to the jail by the Sheriff, after medical treatment. One cannot fault Brevard County or the trial court in its attempt to circumvent section 901.35....

...cap on the liability of government. See generally, Joseph G. Jarret, The High Cost of Arrestee Medical Treatment: The Effects of F.S. § 901.S5 on Local Government Coffers, 78 Fla. B.J. 46 (Nov. 2004); Op. Atty. Gen. 85-6, Feb. 4, 1985 (opining that section 901.35 requires a county to draw from its general fund to reimburse a provider of medical care for treating persons ill or *1203 injured at the time of arrest, regardless of whether the person’s condition arises from or is attributable to t...

...We, accordingly, affirm the judgment entered against the sheriff. We reverse the judgment entered against the city and remand with instructions to enter a judgment for the city. We note that situations such as those under consideration in this case are now controlled by section 901.35, Florida Statutes (1985)....