DR. YVETTE ANS, DR. ROY ANS, AND ANS AND ANS, P.A., PETITIONERS,
v.
JOHN PAGNOTTI, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, RESPONDENT
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.
Court dismissed a petition for certiorari challenging a medical malpractice mediation panel's finding of negligence, holding that certiorari does not lie to review the merits of a mediation panel decision on evidentiary grounds.
A petition for common law certiorari does not lie to review a medical mediation panel's decision on the merits or to challenge the sufficiency of evidence supporting a finding of negligence.
[1] Certiorari does not lie to review the merits of a medical mediation panel decision or to challenge the sufficiency of evidence supporting a finding of negligence; certior…
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 intelligenceA medical mediation panel conducted a hearing and rendered a decision finding actionable negligence. The petitioners sought certiorari review of the p…
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 Medical Malpractice Mediation cases and more on FLexlaw
BERANEK, Judge.
This petition for common law certiorari has been considered on motion to dismiss filed by the respondent. This is a medical mediation proceeding. The panel has met, conducted a hearing, and rendered a decision finding actionable negligence. The petition for writ of certiorari seeks review of the decision of the medical mediation panel and seeks to question the sufficiency of the evidence. The respondent has filed a motion to dismiss the petition asserting this Court lacks jurisdiction and that the recent opinion of the Third District Court of Appeal in Hubacher v. Landry, 360 So. 2d 42, Opinion filed June 13, 1978, warrants dismissal.
It is our conclusion that the petition for common law certiorari herein does not demonstrate jurisdiction and same is hereby dismissed. We adopt the reasoning of the Court in Hubacher v. Landry, supra. We stress that this case involves a decision by a mediation panel on the merits which is questioned on evidentiary grounds. No issue as to jurisdiction is involved as was the situation in this Court’s prior decisions in Perkins v. Pare, 352 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), and Cole v. Wallace, 354 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).
The respondent’s motion to dismiss the writ of certiorari is hereby granted.
CROSS and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hosp. Corp. OF Am. v. Lawyer, 363 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)…d conducted its proceedings pursuant to Section 768.44, Florida Statutes. We issued our rule to show cause to which the respondents filed a response. After numerous other pleadings the matter is now before us for final decision. In Ans v. Pagnotti, 362 So. 2d 459 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978) this Court adopted the reasoning contained in Hubacher v. Landry, 360 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) and dismissed a similar petition for writ of certio-rari which sought review on evidentiary grounds of the decision of a medical m…
-
Morris v. Belding, 364 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)…PER CURIAM. Certiorari denied on the authority of Hubacher v. Landry, 360 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), and Ans v. Pagnotti, 362 So. 2d 459 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). HOBSON, Acting C. J., and SCHEB and DANAHY, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Perkins v. Robert H. Pare, M.D., 352 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Cole v. Wallace, 354 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- George Hubacher, D.O. v. June Landry et vir., 360 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)