EUTIMIO LEAL AND GEORGINA LEAL, APPELLANTS,
v.
PALM SPRINGS GENERAL HOSPITAL, INC., OF HIALEAH, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, 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 held that the dismissal of the counterclaim with prejudice was error, and that summary judgment on the issue of hospital charges was also error due to the existence of genuine issues of fact.
Leal filed a compulsory counterclaim alleging negligence arising from his transfer between hospitals, which the trial court dismissed as untimely. Lea…
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 Reasonableness Of Charges cases and more on FLexlaw
These two appeals shall be consolidated for purposes of this opinion. Issues of law in both cases came about as a result of certain facts which we set forth in detail in a companion case, Palm Springs General Hospital, Inc. of Hialeah v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company; and Eutimio Leal and Georgina Leal, Fla. App.,218 So.2d 793, (1969).
In the trial of this cause, the appellant here, Leal, filed a compulsory counterclaim as to certain acts which he alleged to have been negligent, and which arose from his transfer from the Palm Springs Hospital to Jackson Memorial Hospital. The trial court dismissed this counterclaim with prejudice on the basis of untimeliness. Case No. 67-1059 contends that such dismissal was error, and after considering the argument of parties, we agree. Thus, we hold that the final judgment which dismissed Leal’s counter-claim with prejudice be reversed.
Leal also filed pleadings which put into issue the reasonableness of the amounts charged him by Palm Springs Hospital. The court entered summary and final judgment against Leal as to this issue, and in case No. 67-915, he contends that such judgment was error. We have examined the record and conclude that genuine issues of fact existed which should have precluded the entrance of a summary judgment as to the issue of reasonableness of the hospital’s charges. Therefore, we hold that it was error to enter summary and final judgment against Leal in the hospital’s favor, and reverse.
Upon the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the orders appealed both be, and hereby are reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Palm Springs Gen. Hosp., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 218 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…settlement. Leal was transferred to another hospital on January IS, 1967, and for purposes of this appeal, we need not comment as to any of the circumstances surrounding the move. [See Leal v. Palm Springs General Hospital, Inc., of Hialeah et al., 218 So. 2d 800. (Third District Court of Appeals)] The first confrontation between the hospital’s counsel and Leal’s attorney occurred about January 20, 1967, and it was then that the hospital counsel expressed concern over the effects of the previous circumstance…
-
Adv. 3 D v. Auto Owners Ins. (9th Cir. Ct. App. Div. 2015)…absence of a genuine issue of fact on the material questions of the reasonableness of the charges and consideration for executing the instrument imposing responsibility for the hospital bill); Leal V. Palm Springs General Hospital, Inc. of Hialeah, 218 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969) (finding upon examining the record that genuine issues of fact existed which should have precluded the entrance of a summary judgment as to the issue of reasonableness of the hospital's charges); Eastland Investment Co. v. Baker,…
Authorities Cited
- Palm Springs Gen. Hosp., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 218 So. 2d 793 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)