Riverwood Nursing Center, LLC. etc. v. John F. Gilroy, ind., And John F. etc.
219 So. 3d 996
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Riverwood Nursing Center sued its former attorney, John F. Gilroy, for legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty after AHCA revoked Riverwood’s nursing license by default for failure to timely request a hearing.
- Riverwood alleged Gilroy failed to timely request a hearing on an AHCA administrative complaint, causing the final order and business losses.
- Pre-suit, FLMIC (Gilroy’s insurer) evaluated Riverwood’s claim; FLMIC offered $100,000 to settle, which Riverwood refused and demanded $1 million. Riverwood was represented by counsel during these negotiations.
- Riverwood did not file suit until after the two-year statute of limitations on April 14, 2013; Riverwood conceded the suit was filed late.
- Riverwood argued equitable estoppel should bar Gilroy from asserting the statute of limitations because FLMIC and Gilroy’s pre-suit conduct misled it into forbearance; the trial court granted summary judgment for Gilroy, finding no evidence of fraud or affirmative misrepresentation.
- On appeal, the First DCA affirmed, concluding no genuine factual dispute that would support equitable estoppel given (1) Riverwood had counsel during negotiations, (2) FLMIC told Riverwood before the limitations expired it would not pay more than $100,000, and (3) there was no evidence of concealment, fraud, or affirmative deception.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether equitable estoppel bars Gilroy from asserting the statute-of-limitations defense | Riverwood: FLMIC/Gilroy’s pre-suit communications induced forbearance and misled Riverwood about filing deadlines | Gilroy: No fraud or misleading conduct; Riverwood knew negotiations were limited and had counsel; time remained when FLMIC refused higher settlement | Court: No—equitable estoppel not shown; no false representation, fraud, or affirmative deception; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether summary judgment was appropriate on the estoppel issue | Riverwood: Factual disputes (Hagan’s belief, insurer statements) precluded summary judgment | Gilroy: Undisputed facts negate estoppel elements; summary judgment proper | Court: Summary judgment proper; viewing facts for nonmoving party, no genuine issue material to estoppel remained |
Key Cases Cited
- Glaze v. Worley, 157 So. 3d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Walker v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 160 So. 3d 909 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (view facts in light most favorable to nonmoving party)
- Feizi v. Dep’t of Mgmt. Servs., 988 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (movant must show absence of genuine issue of material fact)
- Parker v. Dinsmore Co., 443 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (summary judgment unsuitable where estoppel or waiver may exist)
- Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 2001) (equitable estoppel can bar statute-of-limitations defense)
- Black Bus. Inv. Fund of Cent. Fla., Inc. v. State, Dep’t of Econ. Opportunity, 178 So. 3d 931 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (elements required to prove equitable estoppel)
- W.D. v. Archdiocese of Miami, Inc., 197 So. 3d 584 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (equitable estoppel requires awareness of right to sue and inducement to forbear)
- Castro v. E. Pass Enters., Inc., 881 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (estoppel requires false representation or concealment of material facts and proof of affirmative deception)
- Rinker Materials Corp. v. Palmer First Nat’l Bank & Tr. Co. of Sarasota, 361 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 1978) (equitable estoppel requires fraud, misrepresentation, or affirmative deception)
- Fletcher v. Dozier, 314 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) (no duty for potential defendant to remind claimant about statute of limitations)
- Riverwood Nursing Ctr., LLC v. Agency For Health Care Admin., 58 So. 3d 907 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (prior appellate decision referenced for AHCA proceedings)