Florida Injury Lawyer Blog

I am a Miami lawyer who sues doctors and hospitals on behalf of injured Florida's injured patients and their families for over twenty years. I have sadly watched the legal rights of injured patients get whittled away since I started practicing law in 1991. But nothing compares to the machete that Florida's Governor Rick Scott has wielded in the short time since his election. Take his latest weapon: Florida's brand new Statute §766.1065 "Authorization for release of protected health information" in claims for personal injury or wrongful death.

Florida does not permit injured patients or their families to simply sue negligent doctors. Instead, the law requires families and their lawyers to engage in a burdensome, expensive, tricky and time consuming ordeal known as "Presuit." It forces the injured to obtain medical records, expert opinions and comply with a complex and downright tricky legal maze before a law suit can even be filed. Generally, Presuit has to start within two years of the incident, giving doctors and hospitals the advantage of having a shorter statute of limitations than every other defendant in the State of Florida simply because they are "healthcare providers." In the end, Florida's malpractice law simply eliminates all but the most catastrophic medical mistakes from even getting filed as law suits. In the end, injuries that do not cause permanent and significant changes in the quality of a patient's life nearly always go uncompensated.

Florida's Statute §766.1065 simply raises the bar by requiring that the Presuit procedure also include an authorization for the release of a patient's protected health information that is "potentially relevant" to the claim. In fact, if the authorization is not provided in the specific format required by the statute the entire Presuit will be deemed void.

Furthermore, Section 766.1065(2) states that if the patient or their family decides to revoke the authorization it will void the Presuit notice and potentially destroy a claim if the Statute of Limitations has passed.

This new "authorization" allows the defendant doctors or hospitals and their lawyers and insurance companies to obtain an injured Florida patient's medical records and verbally interact with the patient's other doctors. It requires the injured patient to provide a list of the names and addresses of all healthcare providers for two years before the incident even occurred. That means that if an anesthesiologist performs a femoral block on the wrong leg, the injured patient will have to give that anesthesiologist, his lawyers, and medical malpractice insurance company the names and addresses of the doctors she has seen two years before the malpractice even occurred. Then the defendant doctor and his team can obtain her records and even speak with her doctors regarding treatments or procedures that have absolutely nothing to do with her claim.

As a Key West PI attorney I fear this will have a chilling effect on patient care. I am concerned that if a defendant doctor and his lawyers are permitted to speak with unrelated healthcare providers and tell them that their patient is engaged in a Florida medical injury claim, some doctors will start treating their patients more defensively or discharge them completely for fear of being dragged into litigation.

Section C of the required authorization allows patients to certify doctors they believe are not relevant to the claim for the injuries but still requires the patient to list the providers' names, dates of treatment, examination and evaluation.

An other potential harm of this statute is that it will force patients who have received treatment for issues that are private and not relevant to the alleged Florida medical mistake to disclose personal medical information. The effect of this statute may coerce Florida's injured patients and or surviving family to simply abandon legitimate claims. For example, it a patient has been treated for a Sexually Transmitted Disease, Addiction or Depression, she will be forced by this statute and its required authorization to disclose this information to sue a Fort Lauderdale doctor who did a botched plastic surgery.

As a Fort Lauderdale lawyer who sues doctors and hospitals, I find Florida Governor Rick Scott's obsession and interpretation of the United States Constitution's Second Amendment frightening. Since becoming Florida's Governor, Rick Scott has done little to make Florida's patients safer.

When he signed the Firearm Owners' Privacy Act into law he sought to prohibit doctors from asking if their patients had access to guns. Governor Scott claims that the law is needed to protect patients from being "harassed" by nosy doctors wanting to know and note if there are any weapons in the house. The law goes on to provide a means to discipline doctors if they violate the law or affect the patient's insurance premiums.

Of course the National Rifle Association is fully supporting Governor Scott on this issue. The most significant critics of this law is the Florida Chapter of the American
Academy of Pediatrics. The AAP claims, when a gun is kept in a home it is 43 times more likely to kill someone known to the family than to kill someone in self-defense.
The risk of suicide is 5 times more likely when a gun is kept in the home.

It is impossible for our Florida personal injury law firm to imagine a scenario where a dispute would arise between the NRA and our governor against a group of pediatricians--but that is precisely what is happening. United States District Court Judge Marcia Cooke ruled that Governor Scott's law was invalid stating that Doctor's have a First Amendment right to inquire about fire arms. Governor Scott is appealing the ruling.

Sadly, our Miami attorneys who represent families of suicide victims have seen first hand the devastation that can happen when untreated or misdiagnosed patients have access to a gun. We agree with Judge Cooke's ruling and urge Governor Scott to reconsider his views on this issue. We believe that patients and their families should be provided with the best and safest medical care. Governor Scott has no business interfering with the doctor-patient relationship, especially when the safety of patients and their families is in question. There simply is no reasonable explanation to pass a law that prevents doctors from simply ask if a gun is in the house.

As a Florida lawyer who sues doctors I was very pleased to see a California jury return a "guilty" verdict against Dr. Conrad Murray for involuntary manslaughter. It is our hope that Dr. Murray never practices medicine again. More importantly, our Miami hospital injury law firm, hopes that this verdict sends a chilling message to doctors across the country who put their own profits ahead of the safety and well being of their patients.

Many might think that what happened on June 25, 2009, in the Holmby Hills, California mansion where Michael Jackson died was unusual. In this case, jurors heard days of testimony about Propofol, the drug that killed Jackson, and listened to the typical defense which is to blame the patient for their own harm. More specifically, Dr. Murray's lawyers argued that the singer injected the fatal dose himself.

The Judge was very clear in his view of the evidence when he issued this statement: "This is a crime where the end result (was) the death of a human being, Dr. Murray's reckless conduct in this case poses a demonstrable risk to the safety of the public. "
He then ordered Murray taken into immediate custody and held without bail.

Of course, Dr. Murray's lawyer was quick to tell the world that they intend to appeal the verdict. It is their right.

Our South Florida patient injury law office investigates cases every day that involve doctors who make mistakes but refuse to accept responsibility. This especially holds true in cases of malpractice that occur outside of hospitals. In Florida, ambulatory surgical centers are utilized with frightening frequency. Ill equipped, under staffed and lacking the supervision and regulation of hospitals, they offer patients an economic alternative to having procedures performed in a hospital.

As a Florida lawyers who sues hospitals, I strongly recommend that if you are considering undergoing an elective procedure and the physician suggests that it be done in a Florida ambulatory surgical center, request that it be done in a traditional hospital operating room instead. In the event there is a intraoperative complication you will be far safer if you are in a hospital rather than near a hospital. The time it takes to call an ambulance and transport a patient to an emergency room can mean the difference between life and death.

Continue reading "When Doctors Commit Murder " »

Our Homestead car crash lawyers are sadly familiar with the consequences of mixing alcohol, drugs or chemicals with driving. We are committed to help stop drunk driving forever and protect families from experiencing the devastation and loss associated with intoxicated motorist.

According to Mothers Against Drunk Drivers the most common signs to be aware when driving among other motorist is:

1. Quick acceleration or rapid deceleration


2. Tailgating


3. Weaving and/or zig-zagging across the road


4. Driving on a sidewalk or on lawns


5. Striking an object, curb, or vehicle


6. Erratic braking


7. Drifting in and out of lanes


8. Inconsistent turn signals


9. Delayed response to traffic signals


10. Straddling center lane markers


11. Driving without headlights at night


12. Swerving


13. Driving much slower then the speed limit


14. Abrupt or illegal turns

    
    

    Our South Miami car accident lawyers recommend that if you see or suspect someone is driving under the influence to stay as far away as possible. Do not try to stop or follow the car. Contact 911 and report the vehicle and if possible the tag number. It is best to leave safety to the professionals and not attempt to disable a suspected drunk driver's vehicle.

    Florida's DUI statute includes alcohol, chemical and controlled substances. It is an offense to drive in Florida if there are impaired normal faculties, or a blood alcohol or breath alcohol level above .08. The penalties in Florida for DUI range from $500 to imprisonment depending on the number of prior convictions as well as whether or not there is injury to person, property or death.

    Since 2002 Florida's Statute §316.193 requires that ignition interlock be installed on certain persons convicted of a DUI and are eligible for reinstatement of either a permanent or restricted license.

Our Florida Publix injury lawyers have represented a number of customers that have been hurt as a result of slipping, tripping or falling merchandise at a number of South Florida supermarkets including, Publix, Winn-Dixie, Wall-Mart and Whole Foods.

The most important legal issue for customers hurt at a Miami grocery store is to understand is that simply falling and getting hurt at a Publix does not legally entitle you to make a claim. People slip, trip and fall every day in these stores, but not necessarily due to the fault of the store owner. Many potential clients contact our Broward Publix accident law firm thinking that simply because the fell in the store they are entitled to compensation. This is wrong.

Florida law requires that for the owner or operator of a store to be held legally responsible for the injuries of a customer who falls due to a slippery or dangerous condition the store customer has to prove that the owner or operator actually knew of the problem or should have known of the problem with enough time that an ordinary business own should have known. In the alternate, the claimant has to show that the dangerous or slippery condition happened so often that their particular situation was both regular and foreseeable. In other words, if you get hurt at Publix by falling on a grape, you have to prove that the Publix knew that the grape was there or it had been on the floor long enough that they should have known.

The is a significant change in Florida law by shifting the burden of proof back into the hands of the injured plaintiff. Florida Statutes §768.0755 is a major victory for business owners, like Publix, and for insurance companies because the previous statute and law were more claimant friendly, making it easier to prevail at trial.

It should be noted that the new Florida Statute does not affect Publix's common law duty to use reasonable care in the maintenance of its stores and to warn customers of any hidden dangers. But there is no mistaking that this new law will have a significant impact in the ability of injured customers to prove and win Florida fall down cases.

Read the lawsuit of a current case our Florida personal injury lawyers have against Publix: Complaint-8100.pdf

As a Coral Gables hospital mistake lawyer, I am confused by President Obama's decision to remove the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) from the web. The NPDB provided the public with various information about doctors, disciplinary actions and malpractice verdicts in general. Patients, lawyers and journalists have used the data bank to obtain information about doctors and trends in medical malpractice.

The NPDB has valuable information and reports. For example, it shows that, as of April 2011, Florida has received 126 medical malpractice reports against nurse midwives and 132 medical malpractice reports against nurse anesthetists. Unfortunately, the information is only available to hospitals, health care providers, State and Federal health care agencies, and quality improvement organizations. Patients and their attorneys are only eligible to receive certain information under very limited circumstances.

In response to a complaint lodged by a neurosurgeon, the Health Resources and Services Administration, which is an agency of the Department of Health and Human Resources removed public access to the data bank on September 1, 2011.

The Kansas City Star recently reported that many doctors with extensive history of malpractice often go undisciplined. The Star reviewed thousands of records and found that 21 doctors practicing in Kansas and Missouri had at least 10 malpractice payments but never received any discipline by the state health agency.

Our Florida injured patient law firm believes that it is important to provide the public access to transparent information regarding both doctor and hospital conduct to ensure responsibility and keep the public focused on fundamental issues of patient safety. By blocking the public's access to crucial information President Obama and the Department of Health and Human Resources will allow doctors and hospitals to continue to quietly make mistakes that harm and sometimes result in the wrongful death of a patient without public accountability.

As a Florida cruise ship passenger injury lawyer I was disappointed that Holland American Cruise Line won a substantial case in front of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals this week in defending an appeal brought by its passenger, Gerald Samuels. Mr. Samuels alleged that while he and his two children were on a seven-day Holland American cruise in November 2008 he was injured while in the port of Cabo San Lucas, Mexico.

According to Mr. Samuels he had never been to Cabo San Lucas before and had asked several "unidentified" Holland American crew members about the possible on-shore activities. He testified that he was assured that a visit to Lover's Beach, located at the very tip of the Baja Peninsula separating the Sea of Cortez and the Pacific Ocean via tender, was safe. He was also promised that he would return in time for the ship's departure. Lover's Beach is a public beach and there are no lifeguards or warning signs regarding any potential dangers.

Upon arriving at the port, he and his children were met by a tender operator who agreed to drop the family off at Lover's Beach. After wading in the water for about five minutes on the Sea of Cortez side, Mr. Samuels decided to swim in the Pacific Ocean side. Within moments of entering the Pacific Ocean side, he testified that he felt "pulled upside down" and hit his head on the ocean floor. He claims he sustained significant and severe brain damage, central-chord syndrome and is now a quadriplegic.

He sued Holland American for negligence and alleged that the ship's crew owed him a duty to warn him of the dangers of swimming in the Pacific Ocean side of Lover's Beach and that, had he received such warnings, he never would have entered the ocean. Holland American entered evidence that in 27 years of sailing to Cabo San Lucas they have never received any complaints or claims regarding the Pacific Ocean side of Lover's Beach and owed no duty to warn Samuels of an unknown danger for a shore-side activity.

The district court granted Summary Judgement in favor of the cruise line and struck the evidence proffered by Samuels. The appellate court affirmed it and stated that in order to recover for negligence against a cruise line an injured passenger must establish the following:

1. Duty
2. Breach
3. Causation
4. Damages

Citing the case of Morris v. Princess Cruise Line, Inc. " ...the owner of a cruise ship owes all on board the duty to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances of each case. ..." Cruise ship reasonable care is different than the extent of the duty owed in daily life since a cruise ship involves more danger to a passenger.

However, the court found that the wading into the Pacific Ocean side of Lover's Beach was "not uniquely associated with maritime travel" and that nearly 100,000 Holland American passengers visited Cabo in 2008 without a single incident of injury. Since Holland did not have active or constructive (knew or should have known) knowledge of the danger the case was dismissed.

Our Broward cruise line injury law firm is dedicated to protect the rights of passengers and urges everyone that is considering a cruise to be extra careful both on board and on shore. Based upon this ruling passengers injured on off-the-ship excursions such as kayaking, zip-lines, scuba diving, and parasailing will have a very difficult time successfully suing a cruise line if they are hurt.

Continue reading "Injured Cruise Ship Passenger's Case Dismissed Against Holland American" »

As a Monroe County hospital injury lawyer, I am painfully aware how kind Florida law is to doctors and hospitals that make medical mistakes, even if those errors end up killing patients. There is a burdensome screening and evaluation protocol that has to be complied with before one can even file a law suit. There is a two-year statute of limitations that can catch grieving widows or parent-less children out of any opportunity for compensation for their loss. There is even a Florida Constitutional Amendment designed to dissuade lawyers from suing doctors or hospitals by capping attorney's fees at ten percent. In many ways, Florida has given doctors and hospitals a license to kill without having to be fully accountable for their negligence.

Without question, the most disgusting law in Florida is §458.320 that allows doctors to practice medicine without malpractice insurance. An increasing number of doctors we sue are practicing without any coverage. Of particular alarm is today's announcement that the nation's largest medical malpractice carrier, The Doctor's Group, is trying to acquire FPIC Insurance Group, which currently insures 18,000 doctors in Florida. Before this deal can go through it has to be approved by state regulators. With Governor Rick Scott in charge, I have little doubt this will pass and The Florida Medical Associations (FMA), Florida's doctor lobby, must be thrilled.

The net result, I believe, will be a chilling effect on the ability of injured patients to obtain compensation from insured doctors who will not participate or testify in cases against other FPIC or The Doctor's Group-insured physicians. It will also lower the bargaining power that doctors have now, with fewer insurers on the market, forcing them to go bare when and if premiums become too high.

Sadly, injured patients often do not know or understand this until its is too late. Demonstrating how little the public knows about these procedures, one of my newer clients just contacted me expecting me to resolve his medical negligence claim once the defendant doctor reviewed his photographs. As a Florida patient injury attorney I had to explain how long, expensive and difficult the case was as well as the idea that a bad treatment result does not always indicate the existence of medical negligence. Even if he wins his case, if the doctor does not have medical malpractice insurance, collection is often impossible.

Our Miami medical injury law firm remains committed to holding Florida's doctors and hospitals responsible for their carelessness.

Our Broward traffic accident injury law firm proudly represents a Homestead, Florida mother of four, Melvina Durden, who was severely injured on July 11, 2008. She was a passenger in a car traveling north on I-95 early on the very morning that the Florida Department of Transportation and its construction contractors opened a new express lane. The lane divided a lane of I-95 with plastic sticks called "delineators." Interstate 95 in Miami is one of the highest used roadways in the world. It essentially links the entire East Coast of the United States from Maine to Miami.

The Florida Department of Transportation or FDOT is a $7Billion agency of the State of Florida responsible for managing the infrastructure of I-95 in Florida. This includes highway expansions and maintenance projects. This particular project is called 95 Express.

The FDOT states on its website that one of its "Safety Goals" is to decrease the frequency, rate, severity and potential for crashes by implementing safety and engineering programs. The FDOT divides Florida into seven distinct districts plus the Turnpike. Miami falls within its District 6 and is overseen by the State Safety Office's Chief Safety Officer.

In 2008, the FDOT decided in an effort to minimize "daily traffic and congestion" to convert two of I-95 northbound lanes from State Road 112 to just north of 151 Street NW to convert them into toll roads. The plan was to open the 95 Express in stages: Phase 1A northbound between I-195 and the Golden Glades, opened first. Phase 1B was the southbound lanes between Golden Glades and I-395, and on the northbound lanes between I-395 and I-195. Phase 2 is from Golden Glades to Broward Boulevard. In October 2010, the FDOT commissioned a survey of South Florida commuters. Did you get surveyed? Neither did I. But the results showed that less than half of those surveyed wanted to see express lanes developed on other South Florida Highways.

Deeply hidden on the FDOT's website are posted guidelines for using the express lanes. In bold print the FDOT advises that the express lanes are for "long distance" trips only. Of course, they don't define how long a "long distance trip" is but they do warn that once you enter the lane, you cannot exit until the lanes end. They continue to say that you cannot cut through the plastic poles to "break out" of the express lane. Valuable information? But unless you drive on I-95 while navigating the website, the only way for commuters to know this would be to rely on signage and warnings.

Unfortunately for Mrs. Durden, a passenger on the very first day of the express lane operation, she did not have the benefit of the FDOTs warnings. Sadly, the driver of her car tried to escape the lane and ended up losing control of her car seriously injuring herself and Mrs. Durden. Suing the FDOT and its contractor on her behalf poses many hurdles as the law is designed to afford the FDOT near bullet proof protection from law suit. Florida Statute S768.28 provides the framework for suing the State and any of its agencies, like the FDOT, for injury, property damage or death. Section 768.21(6)(a) requires that before any law suit can be filed, the Florida Department of Financial Services must be put on notice of the claim within three years of the date of the incident with some very specific information, including the claimant's date and place of birth, social security number and detailed information about any penalties the claimant may have had, including civil, criminal and administrative. In addition the claimant must state whether there are any unpaid debts owed to the government in excess of $200.00. Once the claim is filed and the appropriate agency is served, the claimant must also serve the Department of Financial Services with a copy of the complaint. To make matters worse, the FDOT enjoys a limitations-of-damages cap of $100,000 per claimant or $200,00 per incident regardless of the amount of damages their negligence may have caused. Any lawyer who dares sue the FDOT can only charge or collect as attorney fees 25% of the amount recovered compared to 40% in standard negligence cases.

Our North Miami car crash lawyers recommend that if you are involved in an accident on I-95 due to the failure of the FDOT to properly warn you of a dangerous condition or traffic engineering design defect to immediately consult with an experienced Florida PI lawyer.

As a Miami car accident attorney, I am astounded by Governor Rick Scott's lack of concern for Florida's patients. He has turned down millions of dollars under the Affordable Care Act that would go to providing health care to those who would otherwise be eligible for Medicare. In addition, his Republican-led Legislature has rejected grants that would move long-term patients into their own homes, curb child abuse through in home counseling, educate teens on pregnancy and put tighter grips on regulating the bloated health insurance industry.

This year's Florida Budget left over $8million of federal grants on the table that would have expanded community health centers as well as a Medicaid pilot program that would have provided $2million for a new hospice pilot program for terminally-ill children.

Governor Scott told the New York Times in a recent interview that he did not want to waste state money on "something unconstitutional."

Many of the people our Palm Beach injury lawyers represent have little to no access to medical care or health insurance. It is unforgivable that the State of Florida, which is the fourth most-populated state in the country, only collects $46.4 million out of the nearly 2 billion awarded nationally. This ranks Florida 12th in the amount of money received from health care grants.

In order for Florida to obtain more federal grants it will have to set up an insurance exchange; but with Governor Scott, that seems unlikely. In fact, he has been quoted saying, "I'd rather nobody runs it." If Florida fails to set up an insurance exchange by 2013 the federal government can take it over.

As a Florida injury attorney I was proud of New York State for legalizing gay marriage. Sadly, Florida seems unable to stop its discriminatory and hateful law that fails to not only recognize same sex-marriage in Florida but goes on to not recognize lawful marriage performed and deemed legal in a state or country that has legalized it. Florida Statute Section 741.212 seems to say that Florida knows best that a marriage can only be between one man and one woman. In essence, Florida has a superior legal right to disregard the laws of other states and countries on this issue. This is offensive, nonsensical and in my opinion unconstitutional.

If a corporation is valid in Delaware, Florida law respects it. If an adoption is valid in Arizona, Florida will recognize it. If a marriage is valid in New York, Florida law says it is illegal here. Ever wonder why?

I think it is just too easy to blame this evil perspective on those with strong religious beliefs. Our Miami medical negligence law firm believes this is a calculated effort by those in true power to prevent the compensation of the injured. If same-sex marriage were legal in Florida then every spouse of an injured victim would be able to make a claim for loss of consortium, services and society. (Florida's consortium law recognizes the spouse of an injured person to be compensated). Imagine the millions of dollars that the insurance industry saves each year by hiding behind anti-gay marriage legislation and depriving compensation to the truly injured spouses in what would and should be a recognized marriage.

Furthermore, imagine the effect on taxes, immigration and social security if payments and benefits were afforded to spouses in same-sex marriage. I find it hypocritical that those who are so pro-marriage would deny it to anyone who is willing to commit themselves to another regardless of gender.

Continue reading "Why Florida's Insurance Companies Hate Gay Marriage" »

Our Coral Gables medical injury law firm was horrified to learn about the Florida Legislature's passing of HB 479. This law evidences the further destruction of the legal rights of injured patients, while continuing to provide dangerous and unconstitutional protection for doctors and hospitals. The law is dangerous in that, rather than motivating safer and more humane care for patients, it actually insulates health care providers from legal accountability for their errors.

Yesterday, we discussed how Bill 479 affects expert witness testimony. Today, in Part Two, we discuss "Informed Consent" as it applies to cataract surgery. Cataract surgery is the removal of the eye lens often involving replacement with an artificial lens. Complications to the procedure are bleeding, swelling, retinal detachment and often a secondary cataract.

Florida already had in place the Florida Medical Consent Law that requires doctors to inform and advise patients of the risks of undergoing a procedure. These are often thrust into the hands of a nervous patient moments before the procedure begins. There is no requirement that the consents be uniform, nor that they be in the language of the patient, nor that they be of a certain size font or type set, nor provided days or weeks before the procedure. Of course not, because that would simply make the patient more "informed."

For some inexplicable reason, the Florida Legislature decided that, of all the types of procedures being performed in Florida, cataract surgery needed to have its own informed consent form. This special consent form, if signed by the patient, creates a rebuttable presumption that the doctor actually disclosed the risks to the patient. Therefore, no recovery would be allowed if the patient is injured by a "risk described" in the informed consent.

As a Miami lawyer who represents the elderly, I can only imagine that this law was passed to provide special treatment to eye surgeons to protect them from claims from the injured elderly and those with vision problems who had disputed whether they were properly informed of cataract surgery risks. These are the patients who would most likely be unable to read or understand the consent forms that are thrust into their hands along with insurance papers and prescription authorizations. If the Florida Legislature was truly concerned with having a presumption of proof of informed consent they should have required that the physician performing the procedure personally meet with and video tape the consultation and consent. I am sure that the surgeon that can perform surgery with a laser can operate a video camera, too. If Governor Scott really wants to make sure patients give informed consent, he should have surgeons carefully go through all of the risks with the patient on camera. I am sure that is more reliable than a signature on the bottom line.

Continue reading "Florida Governor Scott Loves Cataract Surgeons " »

As a Florida hospital injury lawyer, I have seen injured patients have their rights chipped away little-by-little. Today, Governor Scott and our Florida Legislature took a wrecking ball to patients' rights and to the U.S Constitution when he signed into law Florida House Bill 479. I am sure that, unless you are a lawyer who specializes in the representation of injured Florida patients you may find it difficult to comprehend the damage this law will cause. The new law's scope is so profound I have to blog in parts.

Here is Part One:

Bill 479 creates a mandatory expert witness certification requirement for out-of-state experts that testify in medical malpractice cases. While this seems harmless, in reality most people do not understand how difficult it already is to obtain expert witness help on behalf of patients. Let's start with Florida Statute §766.203(2)'s requirement that before any doctor or hospital can be sued for malpractice, the patient has to have a sworn affidavit signed by a doctor who is of the same specialty as the potential defendant and has worked in the same specialty for the previous three years. The witness must literally swear that the defendant committed malpractice. Sound simple enough? It's not. In fact, it is very expensive and nearly impossible to find anyone locally who will testify against a fellow doctor in the same community. Most fear that they will be ostracized and blackballed from getting staff privileges, speaking invitations or pharmaceutical grants. This forces injured patients and their lawyers to search out of the state to find willing experts.

Now, Governor Scott passed a law that requires one more hurdle. The expert has to be certified by the Florida Department of Health and pay $50.00. I wonder who at the Department of Health is going to be the gatekeeper on this? The new law goes further in that it will allow the imposition of discipline against the expert who provides "deceptive or fraudulent expert testimony related to the practice of medicine." If it was not difficult enough to find a willing and qualified expert to testify on behalf of an injured patient, now experts are potentially subject to discipline if the Department of Health or the defendant doctor disagree with what they say. After all, isn't this what juries are for?

It sounds to me that Governor Scott and the Florida legislature would prefer to just give doctors and hospitals complete immunity from accountability for the harm they cause, just like foreign diplomats, governmental contractors or big oil companies. That is until someone injures Governor Scott or his family.

The expression "shooting the messenger" took on new meaning when Strax Rejuvenation the high volume South Florida plastic surgery center we are suing on behalf of a number of patients and their families claiming to be victims of plastic surgery malpractice; filed its own lawsuit against NBC News and its famed reporter Williard Sheppard for libel.

Read the lawsuit here:

WTVJ - Complaint in re. Strax litigation (00018684).PDF

Our Broward plastic and cosmetic surgery lawyers represent victims of botched procedures. One our our goals is to communicate the potential risks of plastic surgery while educating and empowering consumers to make informed decisions about the doctors and facilities they entrust their lives to. As a Florida hospital patent's rights advocate I hope that this law suit does not deter the media from reporting cases like Lidvian Zelaya's.

As summer approaches, Florida parents will sign various waivers, releases and indemnification agreements if they want to unload their children at various camps or day care centers. As a Miami-Dade County children's injury attorney, I recommend caution be exercised before you sign anything.

Florida's Supreme Court made it clear in Kirton v. Fields that parents cannot waive their children's rights by signing a release in a commercial activity. This is true in most jurisdictions in the United States. However, what has been defined as a commercial activity has been hotly litigated in the courts.

In 2010 the Florida Legislature once again came to the aid of big business at the expense of injured children by passing §744.301(3). This law, buried under the "domestic relations" section of the Florida Statutes, allows business owners to escape liability when the activity is "inherently dangerous" so long as the business operator acts reasonably. The Statute also excludes claims for failing to warn of a dangerous condition.

To further help business protect themselves from accountability to an injured child, the Florida Legislation drafted the release and put it right on the books for all businesses to use. For example, if your local swim camp has a high rise diving board and your child is severely injured there may be no ability to obtain compensation for their injuries. Especially if you have signed the attached form.

Our South Florida personal injury lawyers recommend that before you put your children in the hands of anyone this summer, you carefully research the training, experience and supervisor-to- child ratio.

Continue reading "Should You Sign a Waiver for Your Kid's Summer Camp? " »