Risk & Rulings | Florida Medical Liability Trends and Results

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

Karlsson v. Doe
Fla. 6th DCA (2026) - Medical Malpractice / Presuit Requirements

Holding
In this Florida medical malpractice action, the Sixth District Court of Appeal held that where the issue is whether a plaintiff received appropriate medical treatment, each named defendant is entitled to the protections of Florida’s medical malpractice presuit requirements under Chapter 766, notwithstanding allegations of sexual assault arising from the treatment at issue.

Discussion
Jane Doe filed a complaint alleging that she was improperly advised to undergo a vaginal examination in the emergency department following a hysterectomy during which a Foley catheter had been placed. She alleged that the examination was wrongfully performed by a physician’s assistant and sued the physician’s assistant, the hospital, the supervising physician, and an emergency department nurse.

The defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that the plaintiff failed to comply with Florida’s medical malpractice presuit requirements. Although some claims arising in a medical setting are not subject to Chapter 766 because they do not involve the delivery of medical care, the plaintiff’s own presuit affidavit characterized the conduct at issue as improper medical treatment and identified what she contended was the appropriate alternative treatment for her condition.

The Sixth DCA concluded that the allegations sounded in medical malpractice. Because the remaining defendants were sued based on the physician’s assistant’s alleged management of the plaintiff’s medical condition, they were likewise entitled to receive a proper notice of intent and corroborating presuit affidavit applicable to their respective specialties and roles in the case.

Practical Implications

• Florida courts will examine the substance of a claim—not merely the label attached to it—to determine whether Chapter 766 applies.
• Claims challenging the delivery of medical care remain subject to medical malpractice presuit requirements, even when accompanied by allegations of misconduct.
• Medical liability insurers should evaluate whether all defendants received specialty-specific presuit notice and corroboration before assessing exposure.

Grazioli v. Palm Beach General Surgery & Dr. Patel
Fla. 4th DCA (2026) – Medical Malpractice / Negligent Credentialing

Holding
In this Florida medical malpractice action, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that a plaintiff failed to satisfy Chapter 766 presuit requirements for a negligent credentialing claim where the presuit affidavit addressed only alleged medical negligence by the treating physician and contained no allegations supporting administrative negligence or negligent credentialing.

Discussion
The plaintiffs filed a medical malpractice action against several defendants, including a negligent credentialing claim against Palm Beach General Surgery ("PBGS"). Prior to suit, the plaintiffs served a notice of intent and a corroborating expert affidavit identifying five ways in which the treating physician allegedly deviated from the standard of care. However, neither the notice nor the affidavit contained allegations relating to negligent credentialing by PBGS.

After suit was filed, the complaint asserted a separate count for negligent credentialing, alleging that PBGS negligently selected and retained the physician. PBGS moved to dismiss, arguing that the claim had not been identified or corroborated during the Chapter 766 presuit process.

The Fourth DCA agreed. While negligent credentialing is a distinct tort subject to Florida's Medical Malpractice Act, the court found that the corroborating affidavit was devoid of allegations concerning the administrative standard of care applicable to credentialing or any supporting facts regarding PBGS's conduct. Allegations directed solely at the physician's medical treatment were insufficient to satisfy presuit requirements for a negligent credentialing claim. Because the affidavit failed to place PBGS on notice of an administrative negligence theory, the court quashed the portion of the trial court's order denying relief on the credentialing claim.

Practical Implications

• Negligent credentialing claims in Florida are subject to Chapter 766 presuit requirements and must be independently corroborated.
• A presuit affidavit must provide factual support for each theory of liability asserted against a defendant.
• Medical liability insurers should closely evaluate whether presuit notices and affidavits adequately address administrative negligence claims against hospitals and physician groups.