McFeely v. Prudential HealthCare Plan Inc., 1D02-1942.

• Decision Date: 06 May 2003
• Docket Number: No. 1D02-1942.,1D02-1942.
• Citation: McFeely v. Prudential HealthCare Plan Inc., 843 So.2d 1023 (Fla. App. 2003)
• Parties: Mark McFEELY and Lisa McFeely, individually and as parents and natural guardians of their son, Patrick McFeely, a minor, Appellants, v. PRUDENTIAL HEALTHCARE PLAN INC., d/b/a Prudential Healthcare HMO and d/b/a Prucare HMO and d/b/a Prudential Health Care System and d/b/a Prudential Health Care System of South Florida and The Prudential Insurance Company of America d/b/a Prucare and D/B/A Prudential Health Care System and d/b/a Prudential Health Care System of South Florida, Appellees.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

843 So.2d 1023

Mark McFEELY and Lisa McFeely, individually and as parents and natural guardians of their son, Patrick McFeely, a minor, Appellants, v.PRUDENTIAL HEALTHCARE PLAN INC., d/b/a Prudential Healthcare HMO and d/b/a Prucare HMO and d/b/a Prudential Health Care System and d/b/a Prudential Health Care System of South Florida and The Prudential Insurance Company of America d/b/a Prucare and D/B/A Prudential Health Care System and d/b/a Prudential Health Care System of South Florida, Appellees.

No. 1D02-1942.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 6, 2003.

Charles B. Patrick, P. A., Miami and James C. Blecke of Deutsch & Blumberg, P.A., Miami, for Appellants.

James M. Kaplan and Thomas M. Hartwig, of Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLP, Miami, attorneys for Prudential Healthcare Plan Inc. and the Prudential Insurance Company of America, Miami; Jeptha F. Barbour of Marks, Gray, Conroy & Gibbs, Jacksonville, for Julie Buckley, M.D.; Charles T. Shad, Jacksonville, for Jacksonville Health Care Group, for Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

On behalf of their son, Patrick, Mr. and Mrs. McFeely brought a medical malpractice action against appelleesPrudential Healthcare Plan, Inc. and the Prudential Insurance Company of America (Prudential).The question on this appeal is whether Prudential may be ultimately held responsible for the alleged negligence of a physician, Dr. Julie Buckley, who was employed by the Jacksonville Health Care Group (JHCG) and worked at a PruCare clinic.In the final summary judgment on appeal, the trial court observed, "while the exhibits, depositions, etc., indicate a substantial amount of control as to the business arrangement between Prudential and JHCG, there is no evidence regarding the exercise of control by Prudential regarding the medical care, treatment and services provided, particularly as to these plaintiffs."The trial court entered final judgement, concluding that Dr. Buckley was not the agent of Prudential.We reverse.

The trial court appears to have relied almost entirely upon the case of Villazon v. Prudential Health Care Plan, Inc.,794 So.2d 625(Fla. 3d DCA2001), review granted,800 So.2d 617(Fla.2001), to support its ultimate decision that Prudential would have no vicarious liability for the alleged negligence of Dr. Buckley.The Florida Supreme Court has now quashed Villazon.SeeVillazon v. Prudential Health Care Plan, Inc.,843 So.2d 842, 854, 2003 WL 1561528(Fla.Mar. 27, 2003).The supreme court in Villazon stated: "Here, the record evidence reflects significant indicia of PruCare's right to control the means by which medical services were rendered by Member Physicians to Member Patients.The facts peculiar to each case must govern the ultimate disposition."Id.843 So.2d at 854.

The facts pertinent to agency in this case are different than the facts present in Villa...