From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Winson v. Norman

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 23, 1995
658 So. 2d 625 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

Summary

affirming an order striking an affidavit and dismissing an action after the limitations period had run, where the corroborating opinion was not from a qualified medical expert because "one of the primary thrusts of Florida's statutory medical malpractice scheme is to `weed out' cases which are not, even prima facie, supported by some reliable independent indication of their merits"

Summary of this case from Largie v. Gregorian

Opinion

No. 94-1676.

July 19, 1995. Rehearing Denied August 23, 1995.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Martin Kahn, J.

Arnold R. Ginsberg and Lisa L. Fialkow, Miami, for appellant.

George, Hartz, Lundeen, Flagg Fulmer and Esther E. Galicia, Coral Gables, for appellees.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUBBART and NESBITT, JJ.


In this "breast implant" action brought against, among others, the appellant's physician, we hold that the trial court correctly determined that the alleged expert who executed the verified written opinion in attempted compliance with the pre-suit screening requirements of sections 766.202(5), 766.203(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1993) was not "duly and regularly engaged in the practice of his profession," as defined by section 766.202(5). The doctor in question had not been engaged in the actual practice for more than a decade prior and had apparently confined his recent professional activities to acting as a "litigation expert" — on behalf of plaintiffs — in cases such as this one. Since one of the primary thrusts of Florida's statutory medical malpractice scheme is to "weed out" cases which are not, even prima facie, supported by some reliable independent indication of their merits, see, e.g., Ingersoll v. Hoffman, 589 So.2d 223 (Fla. 1991); Ragoonanan v. Associates in Obstetrics Gynecology, 619 So.2d 482 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993), it is clear that the affidavit in question was properly stricken and, since the statute of limitations has run, that the action as against the physician was properly dismissed. Cf. Suarez v. St. Joseph's Hosp., Inc., 634 So.2d 217 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Winson v. Norman

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 23, 1995
658 So. 2d 625 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

affirming an order striking an affidavit and dismissing an action after the limitations period had run, where the corroborating opinion was not from a qualified medical expert because "one of the primary thrusts of Florida's statutory medical malpractice scheme is to `weed out' cases which are not, even prima facie, supported by some reliable independent indication of their merits"

Summary of this case from Largie v. Gregorian
Case details for

Winson v. Norman

Case Details

Full title:RITA WINSON, APPELLANT, v. HAROLD G. NORMAN, M.D. AND CORAL GABLES PLASTIC…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Aug 23, 1995

Citations

658 So. 2d 625 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

Citing Cases

Largie v. Gregorian

Although this "defect" was raised long before the statute of limitations ran, the claimant did nothing to…