ST. FRANCIS PARKSIDE LODGE OF TAMPA BAY, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, AND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY AND RESEARCH CENTER, INC., D/B/A GLENBEIGH HOSPITAL, APPELLEES; CHARTER MEDICAL-SOUTHEAST, INC. D/B/A CHARTER HAVEN HOSPITAL, APPELLANT, V. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, AND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY AND RESEARCH CENTER, INC., D/B/A GLENBEIGH HOSPITAL, 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.
Two healthcare facilities challenged the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services' grant of a certificate of need to construct a specialty hospital, claiming lack of standing. The appellate court reversed the dismissals, holding that the petitioners adequately alleged that their interests were substantially affected by the CON decision.
The court reversed the dismissals for lack of standing, holding that when considering motions to dismiss, the Department must accept as true the factual allegations in the amended petitions, and the allegations adequately established that the petitioners' interests were substantially affected by the CON grant.
[1] A party has standing to challenge a government agency's decision if its substantial interests are affected by the decision, and the agency must accept the factual allegat…
[2] A party's allegations that a proposed facility will draw from the same patient base and duplicate services offered by the party's existing facility, thereby potentially l…
Previewing 2 of 2 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“In considering the motions to dismiss the amended petitions, the Department must accept as true the factual allegations of the petitions and may not consider any factual matters outside the amended petitions.”
Establishes the standard for reviewing motions to dismiss petitions—the Department cannot look beyond the allegations in determining whether standing exists.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Department granted a certificate of need to Glenbeigh Hospital to construct a 100-bed specialty alcohol and chemical dependency hospital in Hillsb…
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 Petition For Formal Administrative Hearing cases and more on FLexlaw
BARFIELD, Judge.
St. Francis Parkside Lodge of Tampa Bay (St. Francis) and Charter Medical-Southeast, Inc. d/b/a Charter Haven Hospital (Charter) are before the court on consolidated appeals from final orders of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (Department) which granted motions to dismiss appellants’ amended petitions for formal hearings for lack of standing. Appellants sought formal hearings to challenge the Department’s granting of a certificate of need (CON) to Management Advisory and Research Center, Inc. d/b/a Glenbeigh Hospital (Glenbeigh) to construct a 100-bed specialty alcohol and chemical dependency hospital in Hillsbor-ough County. We reverse.
The Department notified St. Francis and Charter of its intention to grant Glenbeigh a CON to construct a facility for services defined in Florida Administrative Code Rule 10-5.11(27)(c). Charter had pending an application for a CON to construct a facility for services defined in rule 10-5.-11(27)(b). St. Francis is a facility licensed to operate a non-hospital medical detoxification service pursuant to rule 10E-3.43(2), a drug abuse treatment and education residential rehabilitation center pursuant to rule 10E-7.14, and an intensive residential treatment program pursuant to rule 10E-3.45(2).
Charter’s amended petition alleges, in part, that the proposed Glenbeigh facility will service the same patients to be serviced by the proposed Charter facility, notwithstanding the rule distinction between average length of patient stay. The petition further alleges that the Glenbeigh application is incorrect in asserting that the average length of patient stay will exceed 28 days, that in fact the average length of stay will not exceed 28 days, and that the proposed Glenbeigh facility will therefore be no different from the facility proposed by Charter. St. Francis’ amended petition alleges, in part, that it provides some of the same services proposed to be provided by Glen-beigh and that Glenbeigh will therefore draw from the same patient base as St. Francis. Both petitions allege that the duplication of services will lessen the quality of care and elevate the cost of delivering the services.
In considering the motions to dismiss the amended petitions, the Department must accept as true the factual allegations of the petitions and may not consider any factual matters outside the amended petitions. Pizzi v. Central Bank and Trust Company, 250 So. 2d 895 (Fla.1971). The allegations of both amended petitions, if proved, will establish that the petitioners’ interests are substantially affected by the Department’s decision to issue the CON to Glenbeigh. §§ 120.52(ll)(b), 120.57(1) and 381.-494(8)(e), Fla.Stat. (1983).
REVERSED.
BOOTH, C.J., and WIGGINTON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Baptist Hosp., Inc. v. State, 500 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…have recognized that competing health care facilities within the same service area have the right to intervene as third parties.” 484 So. 2d at 1294. And in St. Francis Parkside Lodge of Tampa Bay v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 486 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), the court reiterated that duplication of services with an attendant increase in the cost of delivery of health care services constitutes that substantial interest of an existing health care facility in the same service area whic…
-
FT. Myers Real Est. Holdings, LLC v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg., 53 So. 3d 1158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…76,1078 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (explaining that the question of whether a party has standing is different from the question of whether the party will be able to prove its case); St. Francis Parkside Lodge of Tampa Bay v. Dep’t of Health & Rehab. Sens., 486 So. 2d 32, 34 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (explaining that, at the dismissal stage, the factual allegations in the petition must be accepted as true). Finally, we have not overlooked the Division’s argument that this case is moot based on the recent changes in the l…
-
Psychiatric Insts. OF Am., Inc. v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 491 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…3) both facilities will be competing for the same staff and physicians. The existence of different bed need methodology rules does not control standing. See St. Francis Parkside Lodge of Tampa Bay v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 486 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Although we have determined that standing was erroneously denied, PIO was in fact allowed to fully participate in the administrative process including the hearing below. The erroneous determination regarding PIO’s standing was…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pizzi v. Cent. Bank & Tr. Co., 250 So. 2d 895 (Fla. 1971)