SAMBAMURTHY SUBRAMANIAN, M.D., INDIVIDUALLY, AND SAMBAMURTHY SUBRAMANIAN, M.D., AS ASSIGNEE OF SURGEONS PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY TRUST FUND, APPELLANTS,
v.
HEALTH FOUNDATION SUPPORT SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA, INC., A/K/A, D/B/A AND F/K/A CEDARS MEDICAL CENTER, INC., 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.
Dr. Subramanian appeals the trial court's denial of attorney's fees following a successful judgment in a contribution action against Cedars Medical Center. The appellate court reverses, holding that Dr. Subramanian's offer of judgment was timely served and complied with Florida law, entitling him to recover attorney's fees.
The offer of judgment was timely filed and in proper form consistent with Rule 1.442 and section 768.79, and therefore Dr. Subramanian is entitled to recover attorney's fees.
[1] An offer of judgment is timely if served prior to the commencement of trial.
[2] A plaintiff who prevails in a contribution claim after serving a valid offer of judgment is entitled to attorney's fees under section 768.79, Florida Statutes.
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 offer of judgment filed by Dr. Subramanian was timely filed and in proper form consistent with Rule 1.442, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.”
The court's holding that the procedural requirements for the offer of judgment were satisfied, permitting attorney's fees under section 768.79.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDr. Subramanian was sued by a patient's estate along with another doctor; the jury initially found both doctors 50% at fault. On remand after appeal, …
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 Contribution Claim cases and more on FLexlaw
LEVY, Judge.
Plaintiff, Dr. Sambamurthy Subramani-an (“Dr.Subramanian”), appeals from an Order finding that the offer of judgment to defendant, Health Foundation Support Services of South Florida, Inc. d/b/a Cedars Medical Center, Inc. (“Cedars”) was not valid, and thereby, denying his Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Cost pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes. We reverse.
The instant action stems from a law suit filed by the personal representative of the decedent patient against Dr. Subramanian and another doctor. In the original action, the trial court denied the inclusion of Cedars on the verdict form and the jury found each doctor 50% at fault. On appeal, this Court remanded the case for a new trial to permit consideration of Cedars’ negligence and to apportion fault accordingly. Ashraf v. Smith, 647 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). Prior to the new trial, Dr. Subramanian, individually and as assignee of Surgeon’s Professional Liability Trust Fund (“trust fund”), settled with the personal representative. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, Dr. Subramanian obtained a release which enabled him to pursue a contribution claim against Cedars.
Thereafter, Dr. Subramanian filed suit against Cedars. On March 7, 1997, Dr. Subramanian served a Proposal for Settlement pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442 and section 768.79 in the contribution claim. Cedars did not accept the proposal and the ease proceeded to trial. Calendar call was scheduled for April 21, 1997 and the case was calendared on a two-week trial docket beginning April 28, 1997. The jury returned a-verdict against Cedars and the-doctors finding Cedars 96% at fault, and Dr. Subramanian and the other doctor, 2% at fault each. Pursuant to section 768.79, Dr. Subramani-an filed a Motion for Attorney’s Fees. The trial court found that the offer of judgment was untimely served and denied the motion. We reverse.
The offer of judgment filed by Dr. Su-bramanian was timely filed and in proper form consistent with Rule 1.442, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Therefore, Dr. Subramanian is entitled to his attorney’s fees pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes. Accordingly, we reverse the Order denying fees and remand for a determination of the amount of fees to be assessed.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.