FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
BAYFRONT MEDICAL CENTER, INC., RESPONDENT

Fla. | 2007-04-05
No. SC05-369
WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ„ concur., LEWIS, C.J., dissents.
955 So. 2d 531 Florida Supreme Court (2007) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

An administrative law judge has jurisdiction to determine issues of notice in a Florida Neurological Injury Compensation Act proceeding when notice is raised as part of a claim.


Facts & Procedural History

The Second District Court of Appeal certified conflict regarding an ALJ's authority to determine notice issues in a NICA proceeding. This court previo…

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.

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Bayfront Medical Center, Inc. v. Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Ass’n, 893 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), in which the Second District Court of Appeal certified conflict with other district courts of appeal on the issue of whether an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) has the authority to determine issues related to notice in a Florida Neurological Injury Compensation Act (“NICA”) proceeding. We have jurisdiction. See art. Y, § (3)(b)(4), Fla. Const. We stayed this case pending disposition in Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Ass’n v. Florida Division of Administrative Hearings, 948 So. 2d 705,- 707 (Fla.2007) (“NICA v. DOAH ”), in which we ultimately held that “when notice is raised as part of a claim filed under NICA, an ALJ has jurisdiction to make findings regarding whether a health care provider has satisfied the ‘notice to obstetrical patients’ requirement of section 766.316, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1998).” We thus directed the respondent in the present case to show cause why we should not exercise our jurisdiction, summarily quash the decision under review, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in NICA v. DOAH. Upon consideration of the respondent’s response and the petitioners’ reply thereto, we have determined to do just that.

We accordingly grant the petition for review in the present case, quash the decision under review, and remand this matter to the Second District Court of Appeal for reconsideration upon application of this Court’s decision in NICA v. DOAH.

It is so ordered.

WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ„ concur. LEWIS, C.J., dissents.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …n, but Bay-front Medical Center (“Bayfront”), the hospital where Christopher was delivered, did not provide any notice. Bayfront Med. Cntr., Inc. v. Fla. Birth-Related Neurological Injury Comp. Ass’n, 841 So. 2d 626, 627 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), quashed, 955 So. 2d 531 (Fla.2007). Christopher died as a result of his injuries, and Christopher’s parents (the “Koehers”) filed a medical malpractice action against Bayfront. Id. [*996] at 627-28. Bayfront moved to abate the action, claiming that the Kochers must pursue…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw