The Issue At issue is whether Christopher Kocher, a deceased minor, qualifies for coverage under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan. If so, whether the notice requirements of the Plan were satisfied.
Findings Of Fact Findings related to the parental award and past expenses At hearing, the parties stipulated that there were no monies owing for past expenses, as they had been paid by collateral sources (private insurance). Section 766.31(1)(a). The parties further agreed that Petitioners, as the parents of Christopher Kocher, a deceased minor, be accorded a lump sum award of $100,000.00, as well as an award of $1,500.00 for funeral expenses. Section 766.31(1)(b). Findings related to attorney's fees and costs incurred in connection with the filing of the claim To support their claim for attorney's fees, Petitioners offered what was titled "Ferraro & Associates, P.A.'s Time Sheet." (Petitioners' Composite Exhibit 1, "Ferraro & Associates, P.A.'s Time Sheet"). As explained by Plaintiffs' counsel, at hearing MR. JOHNSTON: And these were -- these are the hours that were reconstructed. Our firm doesn't normally keep time records. We're a plaintiffs firm. But Mr. Falzone did go through and estimated the time that was spent on the NICA related matters and put them in this time sheet . . . . The time sheet reflected 17 hours dedicated to the case by Mr. Falzone, for which Petitioners requested an hourly rate of $500 (a total of $8,500.00), and 109.25 hours dedicated to the case by "different associates," for which Petitioners requested an hourly rate of $250.00 (a total of $27,312.50), for a total award of $35,812.50. Notably, such time sheet is hearsay, and was received into evidence subject to the limitations of Section 120.57(1)(c). ("Hearsay evidence may be used for the purpose of supplementing or explaining other evidence, but it shall not be sufficient in itself to support a finding unless it would be admissible over objection in civil actions.") Consequently, since no witnesses were called or competent evidence offered detailing the services rendered or the prevailing hourly rate charged in the community by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience and reputation, for similar services, there is no competent proof to support an award of attorney's fees. Mercy Hospital, Inc. v. Johnson, 431 So. 2d 687, 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)("[Attorney's] failure to present detailed evidence of his services is fatal to his claim."); Yakubik v. Board of County Commissioner's of Lee County, 656 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)("The testimony of an expert witness concerning reasonable attorney's fees is necessary to support the establishment of the fees.") Nevertheless, at hearing, Respondent agreed that it would accept 37.25 hours (the hours ostensibly expended from November 7, 2000, through April 28, 2001), as reasonably expended in pursuing the claim, and $175.00 as a reasonable hourly rate, for a total fee award of $6,518.75. Here, given that the claim was routine, and lacked any novel aspect that would warrant the time claimed by Petitioners' counsel, Respondent's concession is reasonable. Consequently, given that Petitioners' counsel obviously expended some time pursuing the claim, and there is no competent proof to otherwise support an award of attorney's fees, an award of $6,518.75 is appropriate. Finally, Petitioners seek to recover certain expenses they claim were reasonably incurred in connection with pursuing the claim for compensation. Such costs total $4,139.30. (Petitioners' Composite Exhibit 1, "Case Expense Report," page 3). Respondent does not object to the costs reflected on counsel's "Case Expense Report," page 3, commencing with the entry of November 7, 2000 ($15.00), and extending through the entry of March 20, 2001 ($15.50), totaling $1,036.02. Accordingly, those costs are awarded, without further discussion. As for the balance of expenses claimed, and opposed by Respondent, the record is devoid of proof to support their recovery. Notably, as with their claim for attorney's fees, Petitioners offered neither testimony nor competent evidence detailing the nature of the expenses claimed. Consequently, it would be pure speculation to conclude such expenditures constitute costs that are traditionally taxable, that they were reasonable in amount, or that they were necessarily incurred in pursuing the claim for compensation. Consequently, such expenses are not recoverable.
Findings Of Fact Lukas was born on December 23, 2017, at Sacred Heart Hospital, located in Escambia County, Florida. Donald Willis, M.D. (Dr. Willis) was requested by NICA to review the medical records for Lukas. In a medical report dated January 14, 2020, Dr. Willis summarized his findings and opined in pertinent part as follows: In summary, labor was induced at 37 weeks due to a prior fetal demise. The newborn was depressed at birth with Apgar scores of 1/6/7. Bag and mask ventilation was required for 2-minutes. The initial blood gas after birth had a base excess of -16. The baby was anemic at birth. Evaluation identified adrenal hemorrhage as the etiology for the anemia. MRI on DOL 9 showed a small subarachnoid hemorrhage. The mother was being treated with Lovenox, an injectable anticoagulant. Lovenox does not cross the placenta and would not be factor in the fetal adrenal or subarachnoid hemorrhage. The adrenal and subarachnoid hemorrhage were more likely related to birth related hypoxia. There was an apparent obstetrical event that resulted in oxygen deprivation to the brain. Based on the cord blood gas pH >7.1, it is unlikely any significant oxygen deprivation occurred prior to birth. However, some degree of oxygen deprivation likely occurred in the immediate post-delivery period, based on the base excess of -16 on the initial blood gas in the nursery and both adrenal and subarachnoid hemorrhages identified by ultrasound. I am unable to comment on the severity of the brain injury. NICA retained Raj D. Sheth, M.D. (Dr. Sheth), a medical expert specializing in maternal-fetal medicine and pediatric neurology, to examine Lukas and to review his medical records. Dr. Sheth examined Lukas on February 18, 2020. In a medical report dated March 8, 2020, Dr. Sheth summarized his examination of Lukas and opined in pertinent part as follows: In SUMMARY, Lucas’s [sic.] neurological examination reveals evidence of behavioral problems, and stereotypic behaviors with expressive language delay concerning for autism spectrum disorder, and generalized axial hypotonia and mild appendicular hypertonia evidenced only in gait, with apparent preserved visual acuity, and a history of epilepsy that started at age 6 months and generalized tonic clonic seizures with a history of 4 fever related seizures. Much of Lucas’s [sic.] neonatal course was detailed in the history of present illness. He was born at 37 weeks gestation. Delivery was vaginal with an epidural. The NICU team was called emergently to labor and delivery patient appeared depressed and unresponsive pale. Positive pressure ventilation for about 2 minutes was undertaken. Spontaneous breaths were established at this time. Heart rate improved within 30 seconds of positive pressure ventilation. By 40 minutes of age the patient was active normal tone had a good gag good suck responsive pupils and normal Moro. Serial neuro exams for the next 24 hours of life were normal. He was not felt to meet criteria for brain cooling. MRI revealed a slight extra-parenchymal hemorrhage in the subarachnoid space without significant intra- parenchymal involvement. While he has seizures they did not develop till he was approximately six months old and he was not noted to have neonatal seizures. His head appears to be growing appropriately with regards to head size. He has not had a genetic evaluation or developmental pediatrics evaluation. As such Lucas [sic.]would not appear to meet NICA specified criteria for compensation under the NICA program. A review of the file in this case reveals that there have been no expert opinions filed that are contrary to the opinion of Dr. Willis that it is unlikely that any significant oxygen deprivation occurred prior to the birth of Lukas. Dr. Willis’s opinion is credited. There are no expert opinions filed that are contrary to Dr. Sheth’s opinion that Lukas should not be considered for inclusion in the NICA program. Dr. Sheth’s opinion is credited. The Unopposed Motion for Summary Final Order states that “Respondent has conferred with Petitioners’ attorney and is authorized to represent that Petitioner is in agreement and not opposed to this motion.”
The Issue The issue to determine in this matter is whether the minor child should be awarded compensation under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association Plan.
Findings Of Fact On October 16, 2018, Petitioner Brandi L. Jennings was admitted to St. Joseph's to deliver her child (Killian). As part of her admission that day, Ms. Jennings signed a Receipt of NICA Information ("Receipt") presented to her by St. Joseph's pursuant to section 766.316. The Receipt notified Ms. Jennings that St. Joseph's was furnishing her information prepared by NICA, and stated that "certain limited compensation is available in the event certain types of qualifying neurological injuries may occur during labor, delivery or resuscitation." By providing Ms. Jennings this Receipt, St. Joseph's complied with the terms of the NICA notice requirement set forth in section 766.316. On October 18, 2018, Ms. Jennings gave birth to Killian at St. Joseph's. Killian was born a live infant weighing at least 2,500 grams. However, during the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate postdelivery period, Killian sustained an injury to the brain or spinal cord caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury, which rendered him permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired. (Killian was ultimately diagnosed with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy.) As such, Killian's injury qualifies as a "birth-related neurological injury" as defined in section 766.302(2). Killian was delivered by obstetrician, Kathryn Leenhouts, M.D. Dr. Leenhouts was the only physician who directly provided obstetrical services to Ms. Jennings in the course of her labor and delivery or in the immediate postdelivery period at St. Joseph's. At the time of Killian's birth, Dr. Leenhouts was not employed by St. Joseph's. Instead, Dr. Leenhouts worked for Exodus Women's Center, where she, along with other members of that group, had previously applied for and were granted staff privileges at St. Joseph's. During the year of Killian's birth (2018), Dr. Leenhouts did not pay the assessment set forth in section 766.314, which is required for participation in the NICA Plan. Neither was any evidence offered to establish that Dr. Leenhouts was exempt from payment of the assessment for 2018. Consequently, Dr. Leenhouts was not a "participating physician" in the Plan as that term is defined by section 766.302(7). St. Joseph's, on the other hand, was current with its assessment payments under section 766.314 for 2018. Based on "all available evidence" in the record, Petitioners' claim does not meet the statutory requirements for compensability under the Plan. The evidence produced at the final hearing establishes that the obstetrical services provided at Killian's birth were not delivered by a "participating physician" as defined in section 766.302(7). Therefore, Petitioners' claim does not meet the requirements for compensation under section 766.309(1), and Killian is not eligible for an award of NICA benefits under section 766.31.
