JOHN MARSHALL AND GERALDINE MARSHALL, ETC., APPELLANTS,
v.
HQM OF WINTER PARK, LLC, AND HOME QUALITY, ETC., 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 this wrongful death case, the Florida Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment granted to a nursing home, holding that a death certificate does not constitute conclusive proof of the cause of death and that conflicting expert medical opinions preclude summary judgment on causation.
A death certificate is only prima facie proof of the fact, place, date, and time of death and the identity of the decedent, but does not constitute prima facie proof of the cause of death nor create conclusive proof of any fact related to the death. When conflicting medical opinions on causation are offered, summary judgment is not appropriate.
[1] A death certificate is prima facie proof of the fact, place, date, and time of death, as well as the identity of the decedent.
[2] A death certificate does not constitute prima facie proof of the cause of death.
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“A death certificate is prima facie proof of the "fact, place, date, and time of death as well as the identity of the decedent." § 731.103(1), Fla. Stat. (2007). It does not constitute prima facie proof of the cause of death, nor does it create conclusive proof of any fact related to the death.”
Establishes the limited evidentiary value of a death certificate and rejects its use as conclusive proof of causation.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJoseph Marshall was admitted to Appellees' nursing home on March 4, 2005, for care related to an apparently terminal condition and died the following …
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 Wrongful Death cases and more on FLexlaw
TORPY, J.
In this wrongful death case based upon alleged nursing home negligence, Appel lants, John and Geraldine Marshall, as personal representatives of the estate of their son, Joseph Marshall, challenge the final order granting summary judgment in favor of Appellees, HQM of Winter Park, LLC and Home Quality Management, Inc. Concluding that the grant of summary judgment was improper, we reverse.
On March 4, 2005, Joseph Marshall was admitted to Appellees’ facility for care related to an apparently terminal condition. The following day he died. The primary issue in this appeal is whether Appellees conclusively negated Appellants’ allegation and supporting medical opinion that Joseph’s death was caused by the negligence of Appellees.
At the hearing on Appellees’ motion for summary judgment, Appellees argued that Joseph’s death was caused by the apparent terminal condition that preceded his admission into Appellees’ facility. Although Appellees offered no medical testimony in support of their motion, they did file the death certificate for Joseph, which listed the causes of death and supported Appellees’ argument. Appellants, in turn, filed an affidavit of a doctor who opined that the cause of death was aspiration and vomiting due to the failure of Appellees to appropriately monitor Joseph’s oxygen levels throughout his residence, a cause not listed on the death certificate.
In granting summary judgment, the trial judge apparently gave conclusive effect to the death certificate and disregarded the opinion of Appellants’ expert. This was error. A death certificate is prima facie proof of the “fact, place, date, and time of death as well as the identity of the decedent.” § 731.103(1), Fla. Stat. (2007). It does not constitute prima facie proof of the cause of death, nor does it create conclusive proof of any fact related to the death. As it relates to the cause of death, it simply states the ultimate opinion of the attesting physician. When, as here, a conflicting medical opinion on causation is offered, summary judgment is not appropriate.
We have carefully considered the remaining arguments of Appellees related to the timeliness and sufficiency of the counter-affidavit and reject these arguments for the reasons argued by Appellants.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
GRIFFIN and SAWAYA, JJ., concur.