Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 48 similar cases
MARY LOU BEHAN AND GERALD BEHAN, O/B/O KATHLEEN BEHAN vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 93-002972N (1993)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Fort Lauderdale, Florida Jun. 02, 1993 Number: 93-002972N Latest Update: Jun. 07, 2003

Findings Of Fact Based upon the evidence adduced at the July 14, 1993, Division-conducted hearing in this case, and the record as a whole, the following Findings of Fact are made: Kathleen Behan is the natural daughter of Mary Lou and Gerald Behan. She was born on November 30, 1989, at Plantation General Hospital in Broward County, Florida. Her birth weight was in excess of 2500 grams. Kathleen was delivered by caesarian section performed by the family's obstetrician, Mariano J. Rodriguez, Jr., M.D., after her mother had experienced a spontaneous rupture of the fetal membrane. At the time of Kathleen's birth, Dr. Rodriguez was a participant in the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan. Kathleen had an Apgar score of 6 one minute after birth and an Apgar score of 9 five minutes after birth. Apgar scores reflect the attending physician's or nurse's assessment of the newborn infant's well-being based upon clinical observations regarding the infant's heart rate, respiratory effort, color, muscle tone, and reflexes. The higher the score, the greater the state of well being. The highest score attainable is a 10. Apgar scores are commonly used to determine if a newborn infant has suffered a neurological injury of a substantial and permanent nature during labor or delivery or in the immediate post-delivery process. Kathleen's Apgar scores are not consistent with her having suffered such a birth-related injury. After her condition was evaluated, Kathleen was taken from the delivery room to Plantation's "well-baby" nursery. She remained there without incident until December 2, 1989, when she was found asystolic in her crib after having experienced an acute life-threatening event or ALTE. Kathleen was resuscitated and survived the incident. She, however, has neurological impairment. The neurological impairment from which she now suffers was not the product of oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury that occurred during labor or delivery or in the immediate post-delivery period.

Florida Laws (12) 120.68766.301766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.313766.314766.316
# 1
CONSTELLA STORY, F/K/A BRITTANY C. STORY vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 93-003028N (1993)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Fort Lauderdale, Florida Jun. 02, 1993 Number: 93-003028N Latest Update: Nov. 15, 1993

The Issue Whether Brittany C. Story has suffered an injury for which compensation should be awarded under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan, as alleged in the claim for compensation.

Findings Of Fact Brittany C. Story is the natural daughter of Constella Story. She was born on January 10, 1990, at Broward General Medical Center, Broward County, Florida, and her birth weight was in excess of 2500 grams. Brittany was delivered by George Edouard, M.D., who was, at all times material hereto, a participating physician in the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan. The claim for benefits under the Florida Birth- Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan filed on behalf of Brittany contends that she "suffered a neurological impairment to wit: Erb's Palsy to the left upper extremity at the time of birth." To support such contention, petitioner offered the testimony of Melvin Grossman, M.D., a board certified neurologist, who opined that Brittany suffered a left brachial plexus palsy, an Erb's palsy, and that the injury to the left brachial plexus that resulted in such palsy most likely occurred during the course of delivery. It was, however, Dr. Grossman's opinion that Brittany's mental functioning was age appropriate and not substantially impaired, and that the physical impairment she suffers (left Erb's palsy) is the consequence of an injury to her left brachial plexus, which is not a brain or spinal cord injury. Juxtaposed with the proof offered on behalf of petitioner, respondent offered the testimony of Michael Duchowny, M.D., who is board certified in pediatrics, neurology with special emphasis in child neurology, and clinical neurophysiology. It was Dr. Duchowny's opinion that the condition from which Brittany suffers was not caused in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate post-delivery period in the hospital but, rather, was a consequence of congenital deformity. Dr. Duchowny concurs, however, that Brittany is not substantially mentally impaired, and that a brachial plexus injury, which can result in an Erb's palsy, is not an injury to the brain or spinal cord. Here, it is not necessary to resolve the conflict in the testimony, as to the cause of Brittany's injury, since the proof is uncontroverted that a brachial plexus injury, the cause of Erb's palsy, is not a brain or spinal cord injury. Moreover, it is uncontroverted that Brittany is not substantially mentally impaired. Under such circumstances, the proof fails to demonstrate that Brittany suffered an injury to the brain or spinal cord caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury in the course of labor, delivery or resuscitation in the immediate post- delivery period, or that the injury Brittany did suffer rendered her permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired.

Florida Laws (10) 120.68766.301766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.313
# 3
SUSAN PETTY ROGERS, F/K/A CHELSEA ROGERS vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 95-001642N (1995)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tallahassee, Florida Apr. 05, 1995 Number: 95-001642N Latest Update: Nov. 21, 1995

Findings Of Fact By stipulation filed November 8, 1995, petitioners and respondent stipulated as follows: That pursuant to Chapter 766.301 - 766.316, Florida Statutes, a claim was filed on behalf of the above-styled infant against the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association (the Association) by Susan Petty Rogers and Calyvin Rogers (the petitioners) for benefits under Chapter 766.301 - 766.316, F.S. That a timely filed claim for benefits complying with the requirements of F.S. 766.305 was filed by Petitioners and a timely denial was filed on behalf of the Association. That the Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter of this claim That the parties agree the medical records of Chelsea Rogers reveal that she suffers form an injury to the right brachial plexus. A brachial plexus injury is not, however, a brain or spinal cord injury. Chelsea has also been diagnosed by T. Wayne Conger, Ph.D., a neuropsychologist, as having a cognitive disorder which may be related to her birth. The cognitive disorder is not, however, a brain injury " which renders the infant permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." Therefore, Chelsea does not fit within the strict definition of claims covered by the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association under Section 766.302.(2), Florida Statutes. That the infant, Chelsea Rogers was born at Tallahassee Memorial Hospital on April 5, 1990, and that the said hospital was a licensed Florida hospital. The participating physician who was present at the birth and delivered obstetrical services was A. J. Brickler, M.D. That the infant, Chelsea Rogers, weighed 4,510 grams which is in excess of 2,500 grams. WHEREFORE, based upon the above stipulated set of facts, it is respectfully requested that the Division of Administrative Hearings approve the stipulations as being consistent with the evidence in this cause and enter an order denying the claim against the Association on the basis that Chelsea Rogers did not suffer a birth-related neurological injury as defined by Section 766.302(2), Florida Statutes. The medical records and other documentation of record in this case reveal, consistent with the parties' stipulation, that Chelsea Rogers suffered a right brachial plexus injury at birth. A brachial plexus injury is not, however, a brain or spinal cord injury and such injury did not render her substantially physically impaired. Moreover, while Chelsea Rogers may have a cognitive disorder, she is not substantially mentally impaired.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is ORDERED that the petition for compensation filed by Susan Petty Rogers and Calyvin Rogers, as parents and natural guardians of Chelsea Rogers, a minor, be and the same is hereby denied with prejudice. DONE AND ORDERED this 14th day of November 1995 in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. ___________________________________ WILLIAM J. KENDRICK Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 14th day of November 1995.

Florida Laws (11) 120.68766.301766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.313766.316
# 4
NANCY KEMPER AND JEFFERY KEMPTER, F/K/A JENNA KEMPER vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 97-004577N (1997)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Lakeland, Florida Oct. 08, 1997 Number: 97-004577N Latest Update: Apr. 27, 1998

The Issue At issue in this proceeding is whether Jenna Kemper, a minor, suffered an injury for which compensation should be awarded under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan.

Findings Of Fact Nancy Kemper and Jeffery Kemper are the parents and natural guardians of Jenna Kemper (Jenna), a minor. Jenna was born a live infant on March 27, 1996, at Lakeland Regional Medical Center, a hospital located in Lakeland, Polk County, Florida, and her birth weight was in excess of 2500 grams. The physician providing obstetrical services during the birth of Jenna was Keith Bernard Paredes, M.D., who was, at all times material hereto, a participating physician in the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (the Plan), as defined by Section 766.302(7), Florida Statutes. Jenna's delivery at Lakeland Regional Medical Center on March 27, 1996, was apparently difficult due to her large birth weight, and when delivered she was noted to have suffered an injury to her upper right brachial plexus, an Erb's palsy, which affected the range of motion on the upper right extremity, and is evidenced by diminished range of motion at the right elbow and an inability to freely elevate the right arm above neutrality at the shoulder. Jenna's brachio-plexus injury may reasonably be described as mild to moderate, and her impairment is most likely permanent. A brachial plexus injury, such as that suffered by Jenna during the course of her birth, is not, anatomically, a brain or spinal cord injury, and does not affect her mental abilities. Moreover, apart from the brachial plexus injury, Jenna was not shown to have suffered any other injury during the course of her birth. Consequently, the proof fails to demonstrate that Jenna suffered an injury to the brain or spinal cord caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury during the course of labor or delivery, and further fails to demonstrate that she is presently permanently and substantially, mentally and physically impaired.

Florida Laws (11) 120.68766.301766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.313766.316
# 5
LISA TAYLOR AND CLYDE RAY, F/K/A CLYDE RAY, JR. vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 93-003029N (1993)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Miami, Florida Jun. 02, 1993 Number: 93-003029N Latest Update: Jul. 01, 1994

Findings Of Fact By stipulation filed November 12, 1993, petitioners and respondent stipulated as follows: COMES NOW, CHARLES PATRICK, ESQUIRE, Attorney for CLYDE RAY, JR., a minor, and LISA TAYLOR and CLYDE RAY SR., individually and as parents and natural guardians of CLYDE RAY, JR., and COMES NOW, MARK J. ZIENTZ, ESQUIRE, Attorney for FLORIDA BIRTH RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, who hereby stipulate and agree as follows: That pursuant to Chapter 766, Florida Statutes, a claim was filed on behalf of the above-styled infant against the Florida Birth Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association (the Association) on behalf of Clyde Ray, Jr., and Clyde Ray, Sr., and Lisa Taylor (the Petitioners) for benefits under Chapter 766, F.S. That a timely filed claim for benefits complying with the requirements of F.S. 766.305 was filed by Petitioners and a timely denial was filed on behalf of the Association. That the Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter of this claim. That Section 766.302(2), Florida Statutes, requires an infant to suffer both a permanent and substantial mental and physical impairment to fall within the definition of a "Birth-related neurological injury" making said infant eligible for coverage by the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan. The parties agree that the infant, Clyde Ray, Jr., does not exhibit substantial physical impairment so as to fit within the strict definition of claims covered by the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association under Section 766.302(2), Florida Statutes. That the infant, Clyde Ray, Jr., was born at Jackson Memorial Hospital on June 17, 1990, and that said hospital was a licensed Florida Hospital and the attending physicians were participating physicians within the meaning of Chapter 766, Florida Statutes. WHEREFORE, based upon the above stipulated set of facts, it is respectfully requested that the Division of Administrative Hearings approve the stipulations as being consistent with the evidence in this cause and enter an order denying the claim against the Association on the basis that Clyde Ray, Jr., did not suffer a birth-related neurological injury as defined by Section 766.302(2), Florida Statutes.

Florida Laws (11) 120.68766.301766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.313766.316
# 6
ANGELA HILL AND RICHARD SPENCE, F/K/A MELISSA SARA SPENCE vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 98-001306N (1998)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Fort Lauderdale, Florida Mar. 18, 1998 Number: 98-001306N Latest Update: Aug. 28, 1998

The Issue At issue in this proceeding is whether Melissa Sara Spence, a minor, suffered an injury for which compensation should be awarded under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan.

Findings Of Fact Fundamental findings Angela Hill and Richard Spence are the parents and natural guardians of Melissa Sara Spence (Melissa), a minor. Melissa was born a live infant on January 24, 1996, at Memorial Regional Hospital, a hospital located in Hollywood, Florida, and her birth weight was in excess of 2500 grams. The physician providing obstetrical services during the birth of Melissa was Isabel Otero, M.D., who was, at all time material hereto, a participating physician in the Florida Birth- Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (the Plan), as defined by Section 766.302(7), Florida Statutes. Coverage under the Plan Pertinent to this case, coverage is afforded under the Plan when the claimants demonstrate, more likely than not, that the infant suffered an "injury to the brain or spinal cord . . . caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate post-delivery period in a hospital, which renders the infant permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." Melissa's presentation On April 21, 1998, following the filing of the claim for compensation, Melissa was examined by Michael Duchowny, M.D., a physician board-certified in pediatrics and neurology, with special competence in child neurology. Dr. Duchowny's evaluation revealed the following: HISTORY ACCORDING TO MR. AND MRS. SPENCE: The parents began by stating that Melissa's main problem is that she "communicates well, but her sentence structure is not real good." She apparently knows words and can speak in full sentences, but often tends to communicate her thoughts by gesture. She has not been in a course of speech therapy. Her parents believe that her hearing and vision are normal, although they have not been formally tested. There is no indication that Melissa has loss (sic) any language ability and in fact she began speaking at a year, the same time that she walked independently. Mr. and Mrs. Spence believe that Melissa's motor development has gone well. All of her motor milestones were essentially accomplished on time. She is described as an active and well-coordinated toddler. * * * PHYSICAL EXAMINATION reveals Melissa to be alert, pleasant and cooperative. Her weight is 32-pounds and height 37-inches. The skin is warm and moist. There is one cafe-au-lait spot on the right leg. There are no dysmorphic features and no other neurocutaneous stigmata. The head circumference measures 51.7 cm and the fontanelles are closed. The right ventriculoperitoneal tubing is palpated and an abdominal scar is noted. There are no significant cranial or facial anomalies or asymmetries. The neck is supple without masses, thyromegaly or adenopathy. The cardiovascular, respiratory and abdominal examinations are normal. Melissa's NEUROLOGIC EXAMINATION reveals her to be alert and to have an age appropriate stream of attention. She displays a well-developed level of curiosity, but is fully cooperative and clearly enjoys the social interaction accompanying the evaluation. She spoke in phrases and short sentences. She was able to carry out one and two step commands. There is good central gaze fixation with conjugate following movements. The pupils are 3 mm and react briskly to direct and consensually presented light. There are no fundoscopic anomalies. The tongue and palate move well. There is no drooling. Motor examination reveals symmetric strength, bulk and tone. There are no adventitious movements, focal weakness or atrophy. Melissa has a full range of motion. She has well-developed gross and fine motor coordination. She is able to grasp objects with either hand, but does not display a lateralized preference. Transferring is accomplished readily and she has well- developed thumb/finger opposition. The deep tendon reflexes are 2+ and symmetric. The plantar responses are downgoing. Station and gait are age appropriate with symmetric arm swing. The neurovascular examination is unremarkable. There are no cervical, cranial or ocular bruits and no temperature or pulse asymmetries. The spine is straight. . . . In Dr. Duchowny's opinion, which is uncontroverted and credible, Melissa's neurologic examination revealed only a mild delay in expressive language, most likely developmentally based, which is most likely to fully remit over time. As for her physical presentation, Melissa's neurologic examination was entirely normal, without any evidence of physical or motor impairment. Moreover, it was Dr. Duchowny's opinion, which was shared by Charles Kalstone, M.D., a board-certified obstetrician, that the records relating to Melissa's birth do not reveal any untoward events during the course of labor, delivery, or the immediate post-delivery period which would have caused or contributed to neurological injury. In sum, the proof fails to demonstrate that Melissa suffered any injury to her brain or spinal cord during the birth process, much less a permanent and substantial, mental and physical impairment.

Florida Laws (10) 120.68766.301766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.313
# 7
AIYANNA MALCOLM, (A MINOR), BY AND THROUGH HER PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIANS, DUVAL MALCOLM AND SHAWNTEL GORDON vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 19-005911N (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:West Palm Beach, Florida Nov. 05, 2019 Number: 19-005911N Latest Update: Apr. 06, 2020

The Issue The issue to be determined is whether Aiyanna suffered a “birth-related neurological injury,” as defined in section 766.302, Florida Statutes (2015).

Findings Of Fact On March 20, 2016, the Hospital admitted Shawntel Gordon and she gave birth to a baby girl named Aiyanna on March 21, 2016. As stipulated by the parties, the medical records demonstrate that Amy Jo Gabriel, M.D. provided obstetric services relative to the birth of Aiyanna. Based on the affidavit of NICA’s records custodian, Tim Daughtry, and the official payment history attached thereto, Dr. Gabriel never paid the annual $5,000 assessment required by physicians who elect to participate in the Plan to NICA. NICA lacked any documentation from Dr. Gabriel that she was exempt from paying the $5,000 assessment as a resident physician, assistant resident physician, or intern. Rather, Dr. Gabriel paid $250 to NICA in 2016—the annual assessment for physicians who do not qualify for an exemption and nevertheless elect not to participate in the Plan.

Florida Laws (9) 120.569766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.314 Florida Administrative Code (1) 28-106.204 DOAH Case (1) 19-5911N
# 9
NICHOLAS J. SCHUR AND LISA S. SCHUR, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF NICHOLAS ERWIN SCHUR, DECEASED vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 00-005054N (2000)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Jacksonville, Florida Dec. 13, 2000 Number: 00-005054N Latest Update: Jan. 17, 2003

The Issue Whether birth-related neurological injuries which result in death during the neonatal period2 are covered by the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (Plan) and, if so, whether Nicholas Erwin Schur, a deceased minor, otherwise qualifies for coverage under the Plan. Whether the notice requirements of the Plan were satisfied. Whether the Division of Administrative Hearings has the exclusive jurisdiction to resolve or, alternatively, must preliminarily resolve, whether there is "clear and convincing evidence of bad faith or malicious purpose or willful and wanton disregard of human rights, safety, or property" before a claimant may elect (under the provisions of Section 766.303(2), Florida Statutes) to reject Plan coverage and pursue such a civil suit. What effect, if any, the claimants' settlement with the birthing hospital has on the availability of benefits under the Plan. Whether the participating physician's corporate employers have standing to participate in this proceeding.

Findings Of Fact Fundamental findings Petitioners, Nicholas J. Schur and Lisa Schur, are the parents and natural guardians of Nicholas Erwin Schur (Nicholas), a deceased minor, and co-personal representatives of their deceased son's estate. Nicholas was born September 20, 1998, at Baptist Medical Center of the Beaches, Inc. (Baptist Medical Center), a hospital located in Jacksonville Beach, Duval County, Florida, and his birth weight exceeded 2,500 grams. Nicholas died on September 24, 1998, during the neonatal period at Baptist Medical Center.4 The physician providing obstetrical services during Nicholas' birth was Marijane Q. Boyd, M.D., who was at all times material hereto a "participating physician" in the Florida Birth- Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan, as defined by Section 766.302(2), Florida Statutes. Coverage under the Plan Pertinent to this case, coverage is afforded by the Plan for infants who suffer a "birth-related neurological injury," defined as an "injury to the brain . . . caused by oxygen deprivation . . . occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate post-delivery period in a hospital, which renders the infant permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." Sections 766.302(2) and 766.309(1)(a), Florida Statutes. Here, NICA has concluded, and the parties have stipulated, that Nicholas suffered a "birth-related neurological injury," as defined by the Plan. Consequently, since obstetrical services were provided by a "participating physician" at birth, NICA is of the view that, under the provisions of the Plan, the claim is compensable. NICA's conclusion is grossly consistent with the proof and is, therefore, approved.5 Notice of Plan participation While the claim qualifies for coverage under the Plan, Petitioners have responded to the health care providers' claim of Plan immunity by contending that the participating physician who delivered obstetrical services at birth (Dr. Marijane Boyd) failed to comply with the notice provisions of the Plan. As for Baptist Medical Center, the parties have stipulated that it provided timely pre-delivery notice as envisioned by the Plan. Consequently, it is only necessary to resolve whether, as alleged by the health care providers, the notice provisions of the Plan were satisfied by or on behalf of Dr. Boyd. O'Leary v. Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association, 757 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), and University of Miami v. M.A., 26 Fla. L. Weekly D1473a (Fla. 3d DCA June 13, 2001). Pertinent to the notice issue, the proof demonstrates that on or about January 27, 1998, Mrs. Schur sought prenatal care from her existing provider, Cleveland W. Randolph, Jr., M.D., a physician who, together with Samuel A. Christian, M.D., maintained an office for the practice of obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) known as North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., Beaches-Division I, at 1375 Roberts Drive, Suite 205, Jacksonville Beach, Florida. At the time, Drs. Randolph and Christian, like approximately 40 other obstetricians practicing in the Jacksonville area, were employees/shareholders of North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A. Notably, all obstetricians employed by North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., were "participating physicians" in the Plan. Consistent with that relationship, Mrs. Schur was offered and accepted a "Contract for Obstetrical Services" (on January 27, 1998) which identified North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., as the entity through which Dr. Randolph would be providing obstetrical and post partum care. That agreement provided, inter alia, as follows: North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., provides total obstetrical and post partum care. This includes a physical examination and prenatal care, delivery of the infant and post partum care. Prenatal care includes all office visits and routine lab evaluation related to the pregnancy. Post partum care includes care for problems relating to the pregnancy or delivery and routine examinations, following the delivery up to 12 weeks. North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., agrees to provide availability of a licensed obstetrician on call 24 hours a day in case of emergency. The agreement further established a fee schedule for basic comprehensive obstetrical care, cesarean section, and other obstetrical services. On March 15, 1998, Dr. Randolph notified Mrs. Schur, as well as his other obstetrical patients, that he would no longer deliver babies, and that his "partner, Dr. Sam Christian," would provide that service. Thereafter, on March 23, 1998, Mrs. Schur had a prenatal visit with Dr. Christian (to decide whether she would accept him as her obstetrician) and decided not to continue her care with Dr. Christian (due to his increased patient load). Effective May 19, 1998, Mrs. Schur elected to transfer her obstetrical and post partum care to the offices of Drs. Rebecca Moorhead, Patricia Schroeder, and Marijane Q. Boyd, another small group practice affiliated with North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A. That office, known as North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., Beaches-Division II, was located in a professional office building adjacent to the building occupied by Doctors Randolph and Christian. While the group practice of Drs. Moorhead, Schroeder, and Boyd was affiliated with North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A. (North Florida), and they held themselves out to the public as North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., Beaches-Division II, as discussed more fully infra, the principles structured their business relationship through two separate professional associations. Regarding those associations, the proof demonstrated that Doctors Moorhead and Schroeder were employees of North Florida and Dr. Boyd was an employee (the sole employee) of Beaches Obstetrical and Gynecological Practice, Inc. (Beaches OB/GYN).6 Under the terms of a Management Services Agreement, effective August 1, 1997, North Florida (Drs. Moorhead and Schroeder/Beaches-Division II) and Beaches OB/GYN (Dr. Boyd) outlined the manner in which the group practice of Drs. Moorhead, Schroeder, and Boyd would be conducted, as well as how expenses and revenues would be shared. As structured, North Florida agreed to provide billing, administrative and other support services for Beaches OB/GYN (Dr. Boyd) and Beaches OB/GYN agreed that Dr. Boyd would provide her professional services. As compensation for North Florida's services, Beaches OB/GYN agreed to pay what was essentially one-third of the direct operating expenses incurred by North Florida in the operation of the group practice. As for revenue sharing, the agreement contemplated that North Florida and Beaches OB/GYN would receive a share of professional fees received based on the actual professional services provided by North Florida physicians (Drs. Moorhead and Schroeder) and Beaches OB/GYN's provider (Dr. Boyd). While Drs. Moorhead, Schroeder, and Boyd elected to structure their group practice through two professional associations, they otherwise did business as, and held themselves out to the public as, North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., Beaches-Division II. Notably, the signage on the front door so identified their practice, followed by the names of Drs. Moorhead, Schroeder, and Boyd; and, all paperwork of note likewise identified their practice as North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., Beaches-Division II. Indeed, Mrs. Schur was, at the time, unaware of any entity known as Beaches Obstetrical and Gynecological Practice, Inc.7 Finally, with regard to the manner in which the group practiced, the proof demonstrated that Drs. Moorhead, Schroeder, and Boyd, like many group practices, shared patients, with each patient (including Mrs. Schur) rotating her prenatal care through all three physicians, and shared calls, with each physician on call every third day and every third weekend. With such an arrangement, it was strictly a matter of chance which of the physicians (Drs. Moorhead, Schroeder, or Boyd), all of whom were participating physicians in the Plan, would deliver a patient's child. Regarding the notice issue, it is resolved that Mrs. Schur was provided timely notice that the physicians associated with North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., were participating physicians in the Plan, together with notice as to the limited no-fault alternative for birth-related neurological injuries provided by the Plan. Such conclusion is based on the more credible proof which demonstrates that on June 15, 1998, when Mrs. Schur presented to the offices of Drs. Moorhead, Schoder, and Boyd, that they had an established routine whereby on a patient's first office visit she would be provided the notice contemplated by Section 766.316, Florida Statutes. Here, consistent with that routine, the proof demonstrates that on such date, when she presented for her first office visit, Mrs. Schur was given a form titled NOTICE TO OBSTETRIC PATIENT, which provided: I have been furnished information by North Florida Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.A. prepared by the Florida Birth Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association, and have been advised that North Florida Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.A. is a participating practice in that program, wherein certain limited compensation is available in the event certain neurological injury may occur during labor, delivery or resuscitation. For specifics on the program, I understand I can contact the Florida Birth Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association (NICA), Barnett Bank Building, 315 South Calhoun Street, Suite 312, Tallahassee, Florida 32301, (904) 488-8191. I further acknowledge that I have received a copy of the brochure prepared by NICA. Dated this day of , 19 . Signature (NAME OF PATIENT) Social Security No.: Attest: (Nurse or Physician) Date: Rather than sign the form, Mrs. Schur wrote across it the words "received at Dr. Randolph's." At hearing, Mrs. Schur testified that, although she does not recall the incident, the best explanation she could offer for writing "received at Dr. Randolph's" instead of signing the form was that "someone would have had to tell me to do that . . . [since] I would not have known to write that on there." Such explanation is logical and credible; however, having accepted the explanation for why the entry was made, instead of signing the form, does not detract from the strong inference to be drawn from the entry. Indeed, having written the words "received at Dr. Randolph's" across the form is compelling evidence that, at the time, Mrs. Schur had a clear recollection that, during the period she was under the care of Dr. Randolph, she received notice that the physicians associated with North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., were participating physicians in the Plan, as well as a copy of the NICA brochure that described the NICA program.8 As further evidence that notice was given, it is observed that established routine at the offices of Drs. Moorhead, Schoder, and Boyd also mandated that when notice was given an item titled "NICA ", and contained within a checklist (titled Plans/Education) on a patient's prenatal record, receive a "?" in the space following the acronym NICA. Notably, at or about the same time Mrs. Schur wrote across the notice "received at Dr. Randolph's" the space following the acronym NICA was annotated to read "? c Dr. Randolph." Given Mrs. Schur's entry on the notice form ("received at Dr. Randolph's"), as well as the established routine, it is reasonable to conclude that such annotation was intended to reflect that Mrs. Schur had received NICA notice when she was a patient of Dr. Randolph.9 While the proof demonstrated that Mrs. Schur received notice, as contemplated by Section 766.316, Florida Statutes, that the physicians associated with North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, Inc., were participants in the Plan, it likewise demonstrated that no separate notice was provided that Dr. Boyd, either individually or as an employee of Beaches Obstetrical & Gynecological Practice, Inc., was a participant in the Plan. However, for reasons discussed in the Conclusions of Law which follow, such failure was harmless. The settlement agreement with Baptist Medical Center On June 20, 2001, Nicholas J. Schur and Lisa S. Schur, individually and as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Nicholas Erwin Schur (Claimants) and Baptist Medical Center of the Beaches, Inc., formally resolved all claims or potential claims of the Claimants against Baptist Medical Center and North Florida Obstetrical & Gynecological Associates, P.A., including those matters relating to the pending civil action in the Circuit Court, Duval County, Florida, Case No. 00-01458-CA, Division CV- C; however, the Claimants reserved all claims they had against Marijane Q. Boyd and Beaches Obstetrical and Gynecological Practice, Inc. As consideration for that settlement, the Claimants received the sum of $87,500 and the release and discharge of all claims Baptist Medical Center had against the Claimants arising from the care provided to Nicholas or Mrs. Schur.

Florida Laws (13) 120.68395.002766.301766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.313766.314766.316 Florida Administrative Code (1) 28-106.216
# 10

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer