MITCHELL RUBIN, APPELLANT,
v.
HAROLD GLICK, M.D. AND FLORIDA PATIENT'S COMPENSATION FUND, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Constitutional Law cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant’s sole contention on appeal is that Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.450(e)1 unconstitutionally denies him, a medical malpractice plaintiff, rights accorded dissimilar plaintiffs and that any non-arbitrary basis for this separate classification disappeared when the Florida Supreme Court in Aldana v. Holub, 381 So. 2d 231 (Fla.1980), declared the medical mediation act unconstitutional as violative of due process. Because the appellant did not challenge the constitutionality of the rule in the trial court, we will not entertain his challenge here. Century Village, Inc. v. Wellington, E, F, K, L, H, J, M, & G, Condominium Association, 361 So. 2d 128 (Fla.1978); Sanford v. Rubin, 237 So. 2d 134 (Fla.1970); Granados v. Miller, 369 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Picchione v. Asti, 354 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).
Affirmed.
. The rule provides:
“In any civil medical malpractice action, the trial on the merits shall be conducted without any reference to insurance, to insurance coverage, or to the joinder of an insurer as co-defendant in the suit.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bethesda Radiology Assocs., P.A. v. Yaffee, 437 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)…ees’ constitutional argument, they failed to raise it in the trial court; therefore, it is too late to raise it here for the first time, no fundamental error being involved. See Granados v. Miller, 369 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Rubin v. Glick, 419 So. 2d 817 (Fla.3d DCA 1982); and Hegeman-Harris Co. v. All State Pipe Supply Co., 400 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA), petition for review dismissed, 411 So. 2d 380 (Fla.1981). Accordingly, we reverse and remand with direction to proceed in accordance with the pr…
-
Verde Cap. Corp. v. Gutierrez, 548 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…claim arguing the unconstitutionality of section 95.281, which differentiates between mortgages with or without stated maturities, was not raised and presented in the trial court and cannot be considered for the first time on appeal. Rubin v. Glick, 419 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Picchione v. Asti, 354 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). Affirmed.…
-
The Tribune Co. & James Tunstall v. The Honorable L.R. Huffstetler, Jr., 463 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…ionality. See Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190, 97 S.Ct. 451, 50 L.Ed.2d 397 (1976). In addition, appellants cannot raise this constitutional question for the first time on appeal. See Sanford v. Rubin, 237 So. 2d 134 (Fla.1970); [*1172] Rubin v. Glick, 419 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Sanford v. Rubin, 237 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 1970)
- Aldana v. Holub, 381 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 1980)
- Century Vill., Inc. v. Wellington, 361 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 1978)
- Picchione v. Asti, 354 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Granados v. Miller, 369 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)