PUBLIC HEALTH TRUST OF DADE COUNTY, D/B/A JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, A PUBLIC BODY CORPORATE AND POLITIC, APPELLANT,
v.
FREDDIE MAE GETER, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF FREDERICKA GETER, DECEASED, APPELLEE; FREDDIE MAE GETER, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF FREDERICKA GETER, DECEASED, APPELLANT, V. THE UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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.
In a medical malpractice action arising from treatment provided to a deceased patient, the court affirmed a directed verdict dismissing the University of Miami for lack of vicarious liability while reversing a jury verdict against Public Health Trust of Dade County and remanding for a new trial on damages due to improper and inflammatory arguments by plaintiff's counsel comparing the deceased's life to the monetary value of aircraft and missiles.
The directed verdict for the University of Miami was properly entered because Dr. Saunders was acting solely as an employee of Public Health Trust, not as an agent or employee of the University of Miami, precluding vicarious liability. The jury verdict against Public Health Trust on damages must be reversed and remanded for a new trial because plaintiff's counsel's inflammatory comparisons deprived the defendant of a fair trial on the damages issue.
[1] A directed verdict is properly entered when the plaintiff introduces no evidence from which a jury could reasonably conclude that a physician was acting as an agent or em…
[2] A defendant hospital cannot be held vicariously liable on a respondeat superior basis when the physician involved in the alleged malpractice was acting solely as an emplo…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“The plaintiff introduced no evidence at trial from which the jury could reasonably conclude that Dr. Saunders was working as an agent or employee for the defendant University of Miami at the time of the claimed malpractice, and therefore the defendant University of Miami could not, as urged, be held vicariously liable in this case on a respondeat superior basis.”
Establishes the basis for affirming the directed verdict for the University of Miami—absence of evidence of employment or agency relationship
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFredericka Geter received medical treatment from Dr. Saunders, who was employed by Public Health Trust of Dade County (Jackson Memorial Hospital). The…
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 Inflammatory Remarks cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the defendant Public Health Trust of Dade County from a final judgment entered upon an adverse jury verdict in a medical malpractice action. This is also an appeal by the plaintiff, Freddie Mae Geter, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Fredericka Geter, from an adverse final judgment entered on a directed verdict for the defendant University of Miami in the same action.
As to the latter appeal, we have no trouble in concluding that a directed verdict was properly entered for the defendant University of Miami. The plaintiff introduced no evidence at trial from which the jury could reasonably conclude that Dr. Saunders was working as an agent or employee for the defendant University of Miami at the time of the claimed malpractice, and therefore the defendant University of Miami could not, as urged, be held vicariously liable in this case on a respondeat superior basis. Based on the undisputed testimony offered by the plaintiff, Dr. Saunders was acting solely in his capacity as an employee of the defendant Public Health Trust in providing the complained-of medical services to the plaintiffs decedent. See Bryant v. Duval County Hosp. Auth., 459 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Maguire v. American Family Life Assur. Co., 442 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), rev. denied, 451 So. 2d 849 (Fla.1984); Jones v. City of Hialeah, 368 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 378 So. 2d 346 (Fla.1979).
As to the former appeal, we reverse and remand for a new trial on the issue of damages only. We conclude that the comments by plaintiffs counsel during final argument to the jury to the effect that the jury, in awarding damages, should place a monetary value on the life of the plaintiffs decedent, just as a monetary value is placed on an eighteen million dollar Boeing 747 or an eight million dollar SCUD missile — was improper, highly inflammatory, and deprived the defendant Public Health Trust of a fair trial on the issue of damages. Accordingly, the trial court erred in failing to grant, in part, the defendant’s motions for mistrial and new trial made below based on the above grounds. Russell, Inc. v. Trento, 445 So. 2d 390, 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Seshadri v. Morales, 412 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Martin v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 392 So. 2d 11, 12-13 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
We find no merit in the balance of the points on appeal raised by the defendant Public Health Trust. Accordingly, (1) the final judgment entered in favor of the University of Miami is affirmed, and (2) the final judgment entered against the defendant Public Health Trust is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for a new trial on the issue of damages only.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Giani Fasani v. Kowalski, 43 So. 3d 805 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…n? This Court has previously stated that such “value of life” arguments are improper. Chin, 42 So. 3d at 309; Pajares, 972 So. 2d at 979 (improper to compare plaintiffs life [*811] to a Van Gogh painting); Pub. Health Trust of Dade County v. Geter, 613 So. 2d 126, 127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (counsel’s argument that jury should place a monetary value on decedent’s life “just as a monetary value is placed on an eighteen million dollar Boeing 747 or an eight million dollar SCUD missile — was improper, highly inflam…
-
Carnival Corp. v. Pajares, 972 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…ated by one of the greatest artists in history,” to Pajares’ life, which “was created by the greatest creator there is.” This argument was highly improper. See Dufour v. State, 905 So. 2d 42, 64 (Fla.2005); Pub. Health Trust of Dade County v. Geter, 613 So. 2d 126,127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). Carnival acknowledges that it failed to timely object to this argument, but urges this Court to find that the argument was so egregious as to constitute fundamental error. Although the argument was clearly improper, we find…
-
Chin v. Caiaffa, 42 So. 3d 300 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…per and grounds for reversal. Cf. Pajares, 972 So. 2d at 979 (finding a Van Gogh [*310] comparison to be “highly improper” but not fundamental error); see also Dufour v. State, 905 So. 2d 42, 64 (Fla.2005); Pub. Health Trust of Dade County v. Geter, 613 So. 2d 126, 127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). Lastly, of course, there was reversible error in the trial of this case. It is perfectly permissible to impeach the credibility of a medical witness with statements from the doctor’s own records, including that he was refer…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Russell, Inc. v. Trento, 445 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Jones v. City OF Hialeah, 368 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Lyndell Hart v. State, 392 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Jaffe v. Adolph Schwartz, 442 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- West v. State, 442 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Bryant v. Duval Cnty. Hosp. Auth., 459 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Induru Seshadri, M.D. v. Hungria Morales, 412 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)