TARPON SPRINGS GENERAL HOSPITAL, APPELLANT,
v.
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY MEDICAL FACILITIES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLEE
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.
The court held that the denial of a certificate of need was proper because the agency considered the needs of the relevant service area, and the decision was supported by competent, substantial evidence.
Appellant sought a certificate of need to expand its facilities, but was denied by the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS). The den…
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 Certificate Of Need cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The hearing officer’s order, adopted as the final order of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS), recommended appellant be denied a certificate of need to expand its facilities in a proposed $6.6 million expenditure. The hearing officer agreed with earlier recommendations of the Florida Gulf Health Systems Agency that the proposed bed expansion was unnecessary, that the costs of the project would increase medical costs to patients and that less expensive alternatives were available. See § 381.494(5)(e), Fla.Stat. (1977).
Appellant contends that the denial was based, in part, on HRS’s definition of “service area” contained in its state medical facilities plan. See § 381.494(6)(c). That definition is based on county lines, and appellant points out that, although it is located within Pinellas County, currently over-, bedded according to the state plan, it is within three miles of Pasco County, which is underbedded according to the state plan. Appellant argues the definition is arbitrary and is a rule never promulgated under Ch. 120.
We do not reach appellant’s contentions because the record shows that both the local health systems agency and HRS analyzed the needs of Pasco County before denying appellant’s certificate. The final order and the recommendation of the local agency noted that Pasco County had a projected deficit in 1982 of 54 beds, but that two other hospitals in Pasco County were acces sible to patients within appellant’s service area.
We also disagree with appellant’s argument that the order is not based on competent, substantial evidence. See Bolinger v. Division of Retirement, 335 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).
AFFIRMED.
MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Collier Med. Ctr., Inc. v. State, 462 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…ty on the continued financial feasibility of the intervenors is a recognized interest under Florida certificate of need law. Tarpon Springs General Hospital v. Office of Community Medical Facilities, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 366 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Biomedical Applications v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Community Medical Facilities, 370 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), Medfield Corporation, d/b/a Seven Rivers Community Hospital v. Department of…
Authorities Cited
- Joycie T. Bolinger v. Division OF Retirement, 335 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)