Mieles v. South Miami Hosp., 94-1762
| Decision Date | 30 August 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. 94-1762,94-1762 |
| Citation | 659 So.2d 1265 |
| Parties | 20 Fla. L. Weekly D1986 Rosa Gonzalez MIELES, Appellant, v. SOUTH MIAMI HOSPITAL, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Roy D. Wasson; Roberto Villasante, Miami, for appellant.
Troutman, Williams, Irvin, Green & Helms, Kissimmee, for the Academy of Fla. Trial Lawyers, as amicus curiae.
Wicker, Smith, Tutan, O'Hara, McCoy, Graham & Lane and Shelley Leinicke, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUBBART and NESBITT, JJ.
Rosa Gonzalez Mieles appeals an order granting South Miami Hospital's motion to dismiss her medical malpractice complaint. We reverse.
Prior to filing her malpractice claim against South Miami Hospital, Mieles served her Notice of Intent upon the hospital as required by section 766.106, Florida Statutes (1993). Attached was a "Verified Written Medical Expert Opinion" executed by Dr. Andres Vega, M.D., a physician licensed to practice in the state of Florida and certified by the American Board of Anesthesiology. The last paragraph of Dr. Vega's written opinion stated: "Under penalties of perjury I declare that I have read the foregoing verified written medical expert opinion pursuant to section 766.203, Florida Statutes and that the facts stated are true to the best of [my] knowledge and belief." After Mieles filed her action, the hospital moved to dismiss, claiming that because Dr. Vega's expert opinion was not sworn to or notarized, it was not "verified" within the meaning of the statute. An agreed order was entered requiring Mieles to submit a sworn corroborating affidavit by a date certain. When Mieles failed to timely do so, the hospital again moved to dismiss. Before the hearing on the second motion to dismiss, but six weeks after the filing deadline in the trial court's order, Mieles filed another copy of the original medical opinion, but this time with the addition of a notarization. The hospital again moved to dismiss. Based on Mieles' late filing, the trial court granted the hospital's third motion and dismissed the action.
At issue is whether the trial court erred in dismissing Mieles' complaint based on the untimeliness of the notarized medical opinion, where a timely filed non-notarized medical opinion had substantially complied with the statutory meaning of the word "verified."
Section 766.203, Florida Statutes (1993), requires that during presuit investigation a claimant must submit a verified written medical expert opinion to corroborate that there are reasonable grounds to initiate the medical negligence litigation. The language of the statute makes no mention of notarization, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Crain v. State
...the document be sworn to before an individual authorized to administer oaths. § 92.525(4)(c), Fla. Stat. (2003); Mieles v. South Miami Hosp., 659 So.2d 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); State, Dep't of Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Padilla, 629 So.2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), review denied, 639 So.2d 980......
-
Royle v. Florida Hospital-East Orlando
...with Ms. Walker that these provisions do not suggest that notarization of the medical opinion is necessary. Mieles v. South Miami Hospital, 659 So.2d 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). In Mieles, the opinion of a medical expert was challenged because it had not been given under oath. However, the wri......
-
Florida Hosp. Waterman v. Stoll, 5D02-1053.
...v. Florida Hospital-East Orlando, 679 So.2d 1209 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996), rev. denied, 689 So.2d 1071 (Fla. 1997); Mieles v. South Miami Hosp., 659 So.2d 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Section 92.525 provides that verification may be accomplished by either an oath taken before an officer authorized t......
-
Steele v. Cornett, s. 96-1205
...Belinda and Anthony Cornett. PER CURIAM. The petitions for writ of common law certiorari are denied. Mieles v. South Miami Hospital, 659 So.2d 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). JOANOS, WOLF and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., ...
-
Judicial interpretations of Presuit in Florida: how to avoid the pitfalls of bringing or defending a claim for medical malpractice.
...(1995). [4] Id. [5] Royle v. Florida Hospital-East Orlando, 679 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 5th D.C.A. 1996); Mieles v. South Miami Hospital, 659 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 3d D.C.A. [6] Davis v. Orlando Regional Medical Center, 654 So. 2d 664 (Fla. 5th D.C.A. 1995). [7] Id. [8] Stebilla v. Mussallem, M.D., 6......