ESTINE DAVIS, APPELLANT,
v.
NORTH SHORE HOSPITAL, LEONARD CANTOR, M.D. AND JOHN H. KATHE, M.D., APPELLEES
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 trial court declared Section 768.56, Florida Statutes—which authorizes courts to award reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party in medical malpractice actions—unconstitutional on vagueness and equal protection grounds. The appellate court reversed, holding the statute constitutional and aligning with contemporaneous decisions from other panels.
Section 768.56 is constitutional and does not violate vagueness or equal protection guarantees. The statute meets constitutional scrutiny and is a valid exercise of legislative authority in regulating attorney's fees in medical malpractice litigation.
[1] A statute providing for an award of reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party in a medical malpractice action is constitutional.
[2] A statute providing for attorney's fees in medical malpractice actions does not violate equal protection guarantees.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Section 768.56, Florida Statutes (1981),1 which provides for an award of reasonable attorney's fee to the prevailing party in a medical malpractice action, is unconstitutional because it is vague and because it denies to defendants equal protection of the laws as guaranteed by the Florida Constitution and the Constitution of the United States.”
Statement of the trial court's ruling that the appellate court reviewed and rejected.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDavis brought a medical malpractice action against North Shore Hospital and two physicians. The trial court, applying Section 768.56, ruled the statut…
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 Vagueness Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court ruled that Section 768.56, Florida Statutes (1981),1 which provides for an award of reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party in a medical malpractice action, is unconstitutional because it is vague and because it denies to defendants equal protection of the laws as guaranteed by the Florida Constitution and the Constitution of the United States. This appeal challenges that ruling. We agree with the Fourth District that the statute meets constitutional muster. Florida Medical Center, Inc. v. Von Stetina, 436 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Another panel of this court has similarly concluded that the statute is constitutional in an opinion of this same date. Young v. Altenhaus, So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). 448
Reversed and remanded.
. Section 768.56, Florida Statutes (1981) states: 768.56 Attorney’s fees in medical malpractice actions.—
(1) Except as otherwise provided by law, the court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing party in any civil action which involves a claim for damages by reason of injury, death, or monetary loss on account of alleged malpractice by any medical or osteopathic physician, podiatrist, hospital, or health maintenance organization; however, attorney’s fees shall not be awarded against a party who is insolvent or poverty-stricken. Before initiating such a civil action on behalf of a client, it shall be the duty of the attorney to inform his client, in writing, of the provisions of this section. When there is more than one party on one or both sides of an action, the court shall allocate its award of attorney’s fees among prevailing parties and tax such fees against nonprevailing parties in accordance with the principles of equity. In no event shall a nonprevailing party be required to pay to any or all prevailing parties any amount in attorney’s fees in excess of that which is taxed against such nonprevailing party. A party who makes an offer to allow judgment to be taken against him shall not be taxed for the prevailing party’s attorney’s fees which accrue subsequent to such offer of judgment if the final judgment is not more favorable to the prevailing party than the offer. The court shall reduce the amount of attorney’s fees awarded to a prevailing party in proportion to the degree to which such party is determined by the trier of fact to have contributed to his own loss or injury.
(2) This section shall not apply to any action filed before July 1, 1980.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985)…eal that has addressed this issue has upheld the constitutionality of the statute. See Bayfront Medical Center, Inc. v. Ly, 465 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Frankowitz v. Propst, 464 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Davis v. North Shore Hospital, 452 So. 2d 937 Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Young v. Altenhaus, 448 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Pohl-man v. Mathews, 440 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Florida Medical Center, Inc. v. Von Stetina, 436 So. 2d 1022, 1032 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). In Von Stetina, the district…
-
Cantor v. Estine Davis, 489 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1986)…McDONALD, Justice. We have for review Davis v. North Shore Hospital, 452 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), which expressly declares valid section 768.56, Florida Statutes (1981). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution. The sole issue remaining in this case is whether the petitioners’ contenti…
-
Bayfront Med. Ctr., Inc. v. LY, 465 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…trike demand for attorney’s fees. Other district courts of appeal have considered the constitutionality of section 768.-56 and found it to be constitutional. Frankowitz v. Propst, 464 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Davis v. North Shore Hospital, 452 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Young v. Altenhaus, 448 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Karlin v. Denson, 447 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Pohlman v. Mathews, 440 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Florida Medical Center, Inc. v. Von Stetina, 436 So. 2d 1022 (F…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Med. Ctr., Inc. v. von Stetina, 436 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)