SC05-331 – Stuart Horowitz, Etc., Et Al. v. Plantation General Hospital Limited Partnership, Etc.

State: Florida

Docket No: SC05-331

Case Date: 05/24/2007

Preview:Supreme Court of Florida
____________ No. SC05-331 ____________ STUART HOROWITZ, etc., et al., Petitioners, vs. PLANTATION GENERAL HOSPITAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, etc., Respondent. [May 24, 2007] PARIENTE, J. In this case, a patient with an unsatisfied money judgment against a physician for medical malpractice seeks recovery from a hospital where the physician had staff privileges, alleging that the hospital should be liable to her for failing to ensure that the physician complied with statutory financial responsibility requirements. The issue is whether section 458.320, Florida Statutes (2006), which outlines the financial responsibility requirements for physicians practicing in Florida, imposes civil liability on the hospital under these circumstances. See Plantation Gen. Hosp. Ltd. P'ship v. Horowitz, 895 So. 2d 484 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).

The Fourth District Court of Appeal held that there was no indication of legislative intent to impose civil liability on hospitals anywhere in the statutory scheme. See id. at 488. This decision expressly and directly conflicts with Robert v. Paschall, 767 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), Baker v. Tenet Healthsystem Hospitals, Inc., 780 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), and Mercy Hospital, Inc. v. Baumgardner, 870 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), all of which recognized a statutory cause of action based on section 458.320. We accepted jurisdiction to resolve this conflict. See art. V,

Download SC05-331 – Stuart Horowitz, Etc., Et Al. v. Plantation General Hospital L