Putnam Community Medical Center v. Florida Birth-Related NeuroLogical Injury Compensation Ass'n
204 So. 3d 598
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2016Background
- Infant Jamyrah Debose suffered birth-related neurological injury; born at 39.5 weeks weighing 2,440 grams.
- Mother (Myrick) filed a NICA petition for benefits; Association moved for summary final order denying benefits because Jamyrah was single gestation under 2,500 grams, thus ineligible under § 766.302(2).
- Putnam Community Medical Center (hospital) intervened, asserting it would lose statutory tort immunity if the claim were non‑compensable and sought to defend constitutionality of the weight threshold.
- ALJ granted Association’s summary final order, dismissing the petition as non‑compensable under the statute’s single‑gestation 2,500‑gram minimum.
- Hospital raised a facial federal equal protection challenge on appeal, arguing the different weight thresholds for single (2,500 g) and multiple gestations (2,000 g) impermissibly discriminate among similarly situated infants.
- The First DCA limited review to a facial federal equal protection challenge, found the hospital had standing, and applied rational basis review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether hospital has standing to raise federal equal protection challenge | Hospital: has direct economic interest (loss of NICA immunity) so may challenge statute | Association: hospital lacks constitutional standing | Held: Hospital has standing; tort immunity is a substantial interest supporting standing |
| Whether the statute’s differing weight thresholds are an equal protection violation (facial challenge) | Hospital: single and multiple gestation infants who suffer birth injuries are similarly situated; statute irrationally discriminates based on birth count | Association: multiple gestation infants are not similarly situated; differences rationally related to legitimate state interest | Held: No violation; court finds multiple and single gestations conceivably dissimilar and classification survives rational basis review |
| Appropriate level of scrutiny | Hospital: equal protection challenge warrants review | Association: rational basis applies because no suspect class or fundamental right | Held: Rational basis applied; statute presumed constitutional and any conceivable rational basis suffices |
| Whether the weight distinction is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose | Hospital: threshold is arbitrary in individual cases (e.g., mother small stature) | Association: distinction preserves actuarial soundness of no‑fault NICA program; Legislature considered and rejected lowering weight due to projected cost increases | Held: Weight scheme is rationally related to preserving actuarial soundness and thus constitutional |
Key Cases Cited
- Key Haven Assocs. Inc. v. Bd. of Trs. of Internal Improvement Tr. Fund, 427 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1982) (facial challenges may be raised on appeal)
- Samples v. Fla. Birth-Related Neurological Injury Comp. Ass’n, 114 So. 3d 912 (Fla. 2013) (NICA provisions upheld under rational basis; actuarial soundness is legitimate state interest)
- McCary v. Myers, 125 So. 3d 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (standing threshold discussion)
- Fluet v. Fla. Birth-Related Neurological Injury Comp. Ass’n, 788 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (NICA limits civil liability for participating physicians)
- City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Dhar, 185 So. 3d 1232 (Fla. 2016) (standard of review for constitutional questions; de novo review)
- Doe v. Moore, 410 F.3d 1337 (11th Cir. 2005) (rational basis standard; any conceivable set of facts suffices)
- Amerisure Ins. Co. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 897 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 2005) (explaining lenient rational basis scrutiny)
- Duncan v. Moore, 754 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 2000) (similarly situated persons must be treated alike under equal protection)
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432 (U.S. 1985) (equal protection principle that like persons should be treated alike)