ST. JOSEPH'S HOSPITAL, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
v.
HERBERT CINTRON AND MOLLY CINTRON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENTS AND NEXT FRIENDS OF THEIR MINOR CHILD, SALEENA CINTRON, 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.
St. Joseph's Hospital petitioned for writs of certiorari challenging a trial court's determination that the Cintrons' complaint alleged a cause of action under Florida's anti-dumping statute rather than medical malpractice. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's classification, finding no departure from the essential requirements of law.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's determination that the Cintrons' complaint alleged a cause of action under section 395.1041 rather than medical malpractice, finding no departure from the essential requirements of law based on review of the four corners of the complaint.
[1] A claim under Florida's "patient dumping" or "anti-dumping" statute, section 395.1041, Florida Statutes, is distinct from a medical malpractice claim under chapter 766, F…
[2] A trial court's determination that a complaint alleges a cause of action under Florida's "patient dumping" statute, rather than medical malpractice, will not be disturbed…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“whether the claims filed against St. Joseph's by the Cintrons were medical malpractice claims for which the Cintrons were required to follow the presuit provisions of chapter 766 as a condition precedent to filing their claims or were claims under section 395.1041, the "anti-dumping" statute.”
Establishes the threshold legal issue the trial court had to resolve regarding claim classification.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHerbert and Molly Cintron filed suit against St. Joseph's Hospital in October 2008, more than two years after the events at issue, invoking Florida's …
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 Presuit Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
KHOUZAM, Judge.
St. Joseph’s Hospital, Inc., the defendant below, petitions for writs of certiorari concerning an order denying St. Joseph’s motion to determine reasonable basis for a lawsuit and an order declaring moot St. Joseph’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. We deny the petitions.
Herbert and Molly Cintron filed suit against St. Joseph’s under section 395.1041, Florida Statutes (2004), which is sometimes referred to as Florida’s “patient dumping” or “anti-dumping” statute. Their action was filed in October 2008, more than two years after the events the Cintrons claim were the basis for the suit.
In response to the complaint, St. Joseph’s filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to determine reasonable basis. In its motion to determine reasonable basis, St. Joseph’s asked the trial court to determine whether the Cintrons had complied with the presuit requirements of chapter 766, Florida Statutes (2004). In its motion to dismiss, St. Joseph’s sought dismissal of the complaint on the ground that the statute of limitations for filing a medical malpractice claim in this case had expired. As a threshold matter, the trial court had to determine whether the claims filed against St. Joseph’s by the Cintrons were medical malpractice claims for which the Cintrons were required to follow the presuit provisions of chapter 766 as a condition precedent to filing their claims or were claims under section 395.1041, the “anti-dumping” statute.
A hearing was held on these motions. The trial court determined that the Cin-trons’ claims did not allege medical malpractice under chapter 766 and denied St. Joseph’s motion to determine reasonable basis. St. Joseph’s filed a petition for writ of certiorari in case number 2D08-1965 in regard to this order. The trial court subsequently declared moot St. Joseph’s motion to dismiss. St. Joseph’s filed a petition for writ of certiorari in case number 2D08-2261 in regard to this order. We consolidated the two petitions.
In this certiorari proceeding St. Joseph’s argues that the Cintrons’ complaint alleges a cause of action for medical malpractice rather than a cause of action pursuant to section 395.1041. We have jurisdiction to review St. Joseph’s petitions. See Lake-land Reg’l Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Allen, 944 So. 2d 541, 543 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).
Based on our review of the four corners of the complaint and the limited appendices provided, we cannot say that the trial court’s ruling, i.e., that the Cintrons alleged a cause of action under section 395.1041 rather than a medical malpractice claim, departed from the essential requirements of law.1 Accordingly, we deny the petitions.
Petitions for writs of certiorari denied.
NORTHCUTT and WALLACE, JJ., Concur. . Our opinion should not be read as foreclosing St. Joseph’s from raising appropriate objections should the case develop into a medical malpractice claim.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shands Teaching Hosp. & Clinics, Inc. v. The Est. OF Ashley Lawson, 175 So. 3d 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…unit’s security plan and its implementation as to a particular patient in a locked inpatient unit plausibly involves at -least some degree of medical judgment, thereby distinguishing Lake Shore Hospital. See also St. Joseph’s Hosp., Inc. v. Cintron, 998 So. 2d 1192, 1194 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (anti-dumping claim, on its face, did not set for basis for medical negligence). Some degree of professional medical judgment may be necessary in balancing the relative degree of freedom and restraint a psychiatric [*340] pa…1 / 4
-
Cintron v. ST. Joseph's Hosp., Inc., 112 So. 3d 685 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)…tion that this claim was a medical malpractice claim subject to all of the presuit requirements and the statute of limitations applicable to such a claim. Both the trial court and this court rejected that theory. St. Joseph’s Hosp., Inc. v. Cintron, 998 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). The hospital did not move to dismiss the short complaint for failure to state a cause of action. When it answered the complaint in April 2008, it did include among its sixteen affirmative defenses a defense that the complaint sh…
-
Winniefred Ramsay v. S. Lake Hosp., 357 So. 3d 253 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)…tly moved to dismiss the amended complaint. They argued that Ramsay’s cause of action was actually one for 1 Section 395.1041 has been referred to as Florida’s “patient dumping” or “anti-dumping” statute. See St. Joseph’s Hosp., Inc. v. Cintron, 998 So. 2d 1192, 1193 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). ---PAGE 5--- medical malpractice or medical negligence and was time-barred under the statute of limitations codified at section 95.11(4)(b), Florida Statutes (2015), because it had not been filed within two years of the…
Authorities Cited
- Lakeland Reg'l Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Lona Q. Allen, 944 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)