Risk & Rulings | Florida Medical Liability Developments

Recent appellate decisions and courtroom outcomes impacting medical liability claims prepared by The CSK Medical Malpractice Group

Estate of Garrett v. Lynch
Fla. 2d DCA (2026) – Medical Malpractice / Physician Duty

Holding
The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment in favor of a physician where the estate of a former patient alleged that the physician caused or contributed to the patient’s death by suicide through the management of his care related to a known fentanyl dependency and statements concerning self-harm. The court concluded that no continuing duty existed after the outpatient physician-patient relationship had terminated.

Discussion
The court focused on the scope of a physician’s duty in cases involving suicide. Although a physician may have a duty in certain circumstances to protect an inpatient from self-harm, that duty does not necessarily extend to an outpatient.

Here, the physician-patient relationship had ended before the patient’s death. Because there was no ongoing treatment relationship, the court found no duty upon which the estate could maintain its medical malpractice claim against the former physician.

In reaching its decision, the court cited Chirillo v. Granicz, 199 So. 3d 246 (Fla. 2016), which also addresses the scope of a physician’s duty in the context of suicide and outpatient medical care.

Practical Implications

• In Florida medical malpractice cases involving suicide, the existence and scope of the physician-patient relationship are central to determining duty.
• Duties that may arise in an inpatient setting do not automatically extend to outpatient care.
• Medical liability insurers should closely evaluate whether an ongoing treatment relationship existed at the time of the alleged harm when assessing duty and exposure.

Estate of Everman v. White
Fla. 2d DCA (2026) – Medical Malpractice / Ordinary Negligence

Holding
The Second District Court of Appeal held that the estate of a patient who died from post-surgical complications while in rehabilitation two days after back surgery could pursue ordinary negligence claims against his physician’s surgical group. The claims arose from alleged failures by call center staff and were permitted even though the allegations involving the call center were not included in the medical malpractice presuit investigation involving the surgical group and its physicians.

Discussion
The court examined the distinction between Florida medical malpractice and ordinary negligence, emphasizing the nature of the claims alleged in the complaint rather than simply the defendant’s status as a healthcare provider.

The defendant surgical group also employed, or was allegedly vicariously responsible for, call center personnel who received and communicated patient messages. The estate alleged that call center staff transmitted incomplete patient messages and failed to characterize the communications as urgent, despite their connection to a serious post-surgical complication.

Because these allegations concerned ordinary negligence by call center personnel rather than the provision of medical care requiring professional medical judgment, the claims could proceed even though they had not been asserted as part of the medical malpractice presuit investigation against the surgical group and physicians involved in the surgery.

Practical Implications

• The status of a defendant as a healthcare provider does not, by itself, determine whether a claim is subject to Florida medical malpractice presuit requirements.
• Courts will examine the specific conduct alleged to determine whether a claim sounds in medical malpractice or ordinary negligence.
• Administrative and call center procedures involving patient communications may create separate negligence exposure outside the scope of Chapter 766 presuit requirements.

The cases discussed in this publication may involve profound loss of life. The legal analyses presented address standards under Florida law and do not diminish the seriousness of the harm suffered by those affected.