DEBORAH J. SUMNER AND CLARENCE A. SUMNER, APPELLANTS,
v.
BERNARD J. GROS, M.D. AND CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES OF GAINESVILLE, 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 court reversed the trial court's dismissal of a medical negligence claim for failure to state a cause of action, holding that the complaint sufficiently alleged all elements of medical negligence including the doctor-patient relationship.
A complaint alleging medical negligence states a cause of action when it sufficiently pleads all required elements, including the existence of a doctor-patient relationship, and dismissal for failure to state a cause of action is improper.
[1] A complaint stating a cause of action for medical negligence need not prove the allegations at the pleading stage; the trial court must accept all well-pleaded allegation…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants Deborah and Clarence Sumner sued Dr. Bernard Gros and Cardiology Associates of Gainesville. The trial court dismissed count IV of their thi…
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 Physician-Patient Relationship cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants seek review of final orders dismissing with prejudice count IV of their third amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action, and awarding attorneys’ fees to appellees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2005). The propriety of the trial court’s dismissal is a pure question of law as to which our standard of review is de novo. E.g., City of Gainesville v. State Dep’t of Transp., 778 So. 2d 519, 522 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Our review must also treat all well-pleaded allegations as true, and limit itself to the four corners of the complaint. E.g., Gowan v. Bay County, 744 So. 2d 1136, 1138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). Having thus examined count IV of the third amended complaint, we are satisfied that it sufficiently alleges all of the elements of a cause of action for medical negligence, including the existence of a doctor-patient relationship. Accordingly, the trial court erred when it concluded otherwise. Whether appellants can prove the allegations of their cause of action is irrelevant for purposes of this appeal. Because it was error to dismiss count IV of the third amended complaint, it was likewise error to award attorneys’ fees pursuant to section 57.105.
The trial court’s orders dismissing count IV of appellants’ third amended complaint and awarding attorneys’ fees to appellees are reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.
ALLEN, WEBSTER, and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Todd v. Marvin Johnson, M.D., 965 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…nferences that might be drawn from those allegations.” Mosby v. Harrell, 909 So. 2d 323, 326 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). “The propriety of the trial court’s dismissal is a pure question of law as to which our standard of review is de novo.” Sumner v. Gros, 958 So. 2d 1038, 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). See also Exe-cu-Tech Bus. Sys., Inc. v. New Oji Paper Co. Ltd., 752 So. 2d 582, 584 (Fla.2000) (“A trial court’s ruling on a motion to dismiss based on a question of law is subject to de novo review.”); Rudloe v. Karl, 899…
-
Carter v. Mendez, 139 So. 3d 984 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…d in dismissing the complaint with prejudice. “The propriety of the trial court’s dismissal is a pure question of law as to which our standard of review is de novo. ” Todd v. Johnson, 965 So. 2d 255, 257 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (quoting Sumner v. Gros, 958 So. 2d 1038, 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)). Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(j) states: If service of the initial process and initial pleading is not made upon a defendant within 120 days after filing of the initial pleading directed to that defendant the co…
-
Abel Turner v. Donna Knight and her heirs (Fla. 1st DCA 2023)…plaint. Santiago v. Mauna Loa Investments, LLC, 189 So. 3d 752, 756 (Fla. 2016) (“Thus, review for the sufficiency of a complaint to state a cause of action is limited solely to the complaint at issue and its attachments.”); see also Sumner v. Gros, 958 So. 2d 1038, 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). The trial court’s order granting the motion to dismiss stated that the court heard argument and extensive testimony from the parties, specifically stating, “the record showed that [Appellant] is already in possession of a…
Authorities Cited
- City OF Gainesville v. State, 778 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Gowan v. BAY Cnty., 744 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)