All Children's Hospital, Inc. v. Department of Administrative Hearings
55 So. 3d 670
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Glenns filed suit for severe birth injuries against multiple defendants; settlements occurred with obstetrician, his practice, and Bayfront Hospital, leaving All Children's Hospital as remaining defendant.
- All Children's asserted NICA immunity under section 766.303(2), arguing the Glenns’ exclusive remedy was NICA for a compensable injury.
- An administrative law judge (ALJ) held Bayfront failed to give required NICA notice, which meant All Children's could not invoke NICA immunity, so the Glenns proceeded in tort.
- This court previously reversed and remanded, with the Florida Supreme Court quashing and directing reconsideration, clarifying NICA notice is severable and not all providers must have given notice to immunize all others.
- The Supreme Court instructed remand on two issues: (1) whether All Children's is shielded by agency or imputing Bayfront’s notice failure, and (2) whether the injury occurred within the NICA compensable window of labor/delivery/post-resuscitation.
- On remand, the Second District confined its consideration to the observations above, noting the agency issue was unpreserved in the lower tribunal and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s guidance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| NICA immunity applicability despite notice issues | Glenns argue immunity hinges on notice failure by any provider. | All Children's argues proper notice by any provider immunizes all involved. | Remanded; court limited ruling to prior observations; immunity issue unresolved. |
| Imputation of Bayfront's notice to All Children's via agency | Glenns contend agency relationship imputes Bayfront's notice failure to All Children's. | All Children's defense relies on no agency-imputed notice; no preservation of this theory below. | Remanded; court will address agency issue on remand; not resolved here. |
| Timing of injuries for NICA tort immunity | Glenns contend injuries occurred within labor/delivery/immediate post-resuscitation window. | All Children's argues the timing is outside NICA’s compensable window. | Remanded; not decided in this opinion; focus remained on notice and agency theories. |
Key Cases Cited
- Galen of Fla., Inc. v. Braniff, 696 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1997) (notice constitutes a condition precedent to tort immunity under NICA)
- Fla. Birth-Related Neurological Injury Comp. Ass'n v. Dep't of Admin. Hearings, 29 So.3d 992 (Fla.2010) (severability of NICA notice; one missed notice does not immunize all providers)
- All Children's Hosp., Inc. v. Dep't of Admin. Hearings, 989 So.2d 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (intermediate ruling on NICA notice and immunity (reversed on remand))
- Fla. Birth-Related Neurological Injury Comp. Ass'n v. Fla. Div. of Admin. Hearings, 948 So.2d 705 (Fla. 2007) (remand following Supreme Court decision; guidance on NICA issues)
- All Children's Hosp., Inc. v. Dep't of Admin. Hearings, 863 So.2d 450 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (initial appeal related to NICA immunity and notice)