Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 9.130.
Previously in this case and on our own motion, we amended Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130 (Proceedings to Review Nonfinal Orders and Specified Final Orders) to amend the list of nonfinal orders appealable to the district courts of appeal to include those “deny[ing] a motion to dismiss on the basis of the qualifications of a corroborating expert witness under subsections 766.102(5)-(9), Florida Statutes.” Because the amendment was not published for comment prior to its adoption, we gave interested persons seventy-five days in which to file comments on the amendment. Three comments were received by the Court.
Having considered the comments filed, we further amend rule 9.130(a)(3)(H) to reference subsection (12) of section 766.102, because subsection (12) also articulates the qualifications of a corroborating expert witness.
Accordingly, we amend the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure as reflected in the appendix to this opinion. New language is indicated by underscoring. The amendment shall become effective immediately upon the release of this opinion.
It is so ordered.
Recently, the majority amended Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130 on its own motion, the effect of which was to “permit interlocutory review of nonfinal orders that deny motions to dismiss on the basis of the qualifications of a corroborating witness in medical malpractice cases.” In re Amend. to Fla. Rule of App. Proc. 9.130, 367 So. 3d 1204, 1205 (Fla. 2023) (Labarga, J., dissenting). I dissented to the majority's action on the ground that rather than invite the submission of comments after the fact, this Court should have sent a referral to the appropriate rules committee beforehand. See id.
Indeed, in response to the amendment, the Appellate Court Rules Committee submitted a detailed comment that may lead to further amendments. Although I understand that sua sponte rule amendments may occasionally be necessary to address pressing matters, my concern is that a pattern of rule amendments involving significant changes—with a retroactive comment period—does not always reflect the most efficient nor the most effective way of fully incorporating the input of relevant entities.
APPENDIX
RULE 9.130. PROCEEDINGS TO REVIEW NONFINAL ORDERS AND SPECIFIED FINAL ORDERS
(a) Applicability.
(1)-(2) [No Change]
(3) Appeals to the district courts of appeal of nonfinal orders are limited to those that:
(A)-(G) [No Change]
(H) deny a motion to dismiss on the basis of the qualifications of a corroborating expert witness under subsections 766.102(5)-(9), and (12), Florida Statutes.
(4)-(5) [No Change]
(b)-(i) [No Change]
Committee Notes
[No Change]
PER CURIAM.
MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, COURIEL, GROSSHANS, FRANCIS, and SASSO, JJ., concur. LABARGA, J., dissents with an opinion.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. SC2023-0701
Decided: December 14, 2023
Court: Supreme Court of Florida.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)