CRESPO v. HERNANDEZ LLC (2014)

Lualhati CRESPO and Jose Crespo, Appellants, v. Eileen HERNANDEZ, M.D. and Women's Care Florida, LLC d/b/a Partners in Women's Healthcare, Appellees.

No. 5D14–759.

Decided: October 24, 2014

Jessie L. Harrell and Bryan S. Gowdy, of Creed & Gowdy, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellants. Thomas E. Dukes, III, and Ruth C. Osborne, of McEwan, Martinez, & Dukes, P.A., Orlando, for Appellees.

The arbitration agreement at issue violates the public policy pronounced by the Legislature in the Medical Malpractice Act, chapter 766, Florida Statutes (2012), by failing to adopt the necessary statutory provisions. Franks v. Bowers, 116 So.3d 1240, 1248 (Fla.2013) (“Because the Legislature explicitly found that the MMA was necessary to lower the costs of medical care in this State, we find that any contract that seeks to enjoy the benefits of the arbitration provisions under the statutory scheme must necessarily adopt all of its provisions.”). Therefore, we reverse the order rendered by the trial court compelling binding arbitration pursuant to the arbitration agreement under review. We certify conflict with the decision of the Second District Court of Appeal in Santiago v. Baker, 135 So.3d 569 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). We remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings.

REVERSED; REMANDED; CONFLICT CERTIFIED.

PER CURIAM.

TORPY, C.J., SAWAYA and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network