203 So. 3d 924
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2016Background
- Annie Godwin was admitted to Tampa General Hospital (TGH) and diagnosed with colon cancer; during surgery by Drs. Jaime Sanchez and David Shapiro she suffered a torn inferior vena cava and died on the table.
- Mrs. Godwin signed three hospital/consent documents: a Special Notice (disclosing that some care may be provided by University of South Florida (USF) physicians who are not TGH agents), a Certification & Authorization (stating various physicians are independent practitioners and not TGH agents), and a Consent & Disclosure form.
- USF and TGH had an affiliation agreement making TGH the clinical teaching site and stating USF employees assigned to TGH are not employees or agents of TGH; USF selected, paid, and supervised the physicians.
- Godwin (personal representative) sued TGH, USF, and the physicians for malpractice, alleging TGH is liable under apparent agency, a contractual nondelegable duty, noncompliance with Fla. Stat. § 1012.965, and that Medicare participation imposes a nondelegable statutory duty.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for TGH and denied Godwin’s motion for partial summary judgment on nondelegable duty; the appeals court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether surgeons were apparent agents of TGH | Godwin: TGH held out USF physicians as hospital agents, so TGH is vicariously liable | TGH: Physicians were USF employees/agents under the affiliation agreement; patient received written notice they were not TGH employees | Court: No apparent agency; undisputed evidence and signed notices show physicians were USF employees, not TGH agents |
| Whether Special Notice complied with § 1012.965 | Godwin: Notice was noncompliant (cites Rayburn), so TGH could not delegate liability | TGH: Notice was separate, conspicuous, and signed as statute requires | Court: Notice complied with § 1012.965 — separate, conspicuous, and acknowledged in writing; statute’s requirements satisfied |
| Whether TGH had a contractual nondelegable duty to provide nonnegligent surgical care | Godwin: TGH undertook a contractual duty and cannot escape liability by delegating performance | TGH: No express contractual undertaking by TGH to provide the physicians’ services; delegation to USF permitted by statute and agreements | Court: No express undertaking by TGH; forms did not create a contractual nondelegable duty, and statutory notice/affiliation allocate responsibility to USF |
| Whether Medicare regulations impose a nondelegable statutory tort duty on hospitals | Godwin: Participation in Medicare and 42 C.F.R. § 482.12 creates nondelegable duty | TGH: Medicare Conditions of Participation govern eligibility/compliance and quality assurance, not state tort liability | Court: Declined to impose new tort duty; Medicare rules govern participation and survey/QA, not creation of state tort liability |
Key Cases Cited
- Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 2000) (standard: appellate review of summary judgment is de novo)
- Rayburn v. Orange Park Med. Ctr., 842 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (discussing notice requirements under predecessor statute)
- Newbold-Ferguson v. AMISUB (N. Ridge Hosp.), Inc., 85 So. 3d 502 (Fla. 2012) (hospital generally not liable for nonemployee physician absent exceptions)
- Irving v. Doctors Hosp. of Lake Worth, Inc., 415 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (estoppel/holding out can create liability where patient had no notice of independent status)
- DeRosa v. Shands Teaching Hosp. & Clinics, Inc., 504 So. 2d 1313 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (factors for employer‑employee relationship include selection, payment, dismissal power, and control)
- Pope v. Winter Park Healthcare Grp., Ltd., 939 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (hospital admission/consent language may create an express contractual duty to furnish care)