Howard v. NewmanHoward v. Newman
In this case of first impression we are asked to determine whether the phrase “medically or scientifically demonstrable” in
The Second District Court of Appeal in Johnson v. Phillips, 345 So.2d 1116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977), determined that the term “permanent injury” in
“A serious, nonpermanent injury which has a material degree of bearing on the injured person‘s ability to resume his normal activity and lifestyle during all or substantially all of the 90 day period after the occurrence of the injury, and the effects of which are medically or scientifically demonstrable at the end of such period.”
In that subparagraph, the Legislature has chosen to insert the qualifying phrase “the effects of which are medically or scientifically demonstrable.” We do not believe that that phrase is intended to be without meaning or effect. Thus, we interpret the phrase “medically or scientifically demonstrable” to require the plaintiff to show objective signs of injury.
In light of this interpretation, we affirm the action of the trial court dismissing the complaint without prejudice for failure to meet the threshold requirements of
SMITH, Acting C.J., ERVIN, J., and MITCHELL, HENRY CLAY, Jr., Associate Judge, concur.