Florida's Comprehensive Medical Malpractice Reform Act: Is It Time for a Change

Authors

Jessica Fonseca-Nader

First Page

551

Document Type

Comment

Abstract

This Comment will focus on a review of the Act, its intended purposes and goals, and its effects on medical malpractice. I attempt to show that the benefits, if any, which have resulted from the Act are not worth the adverse effects the statute has had on seriously injured plaintiffs. Part II discusses the history of the Act, focusing on the constitutional challenges and modifications the Act has met and often overcome. Part III is an analysis regarding what a medical malpractice claimant must overcome to bring an action against the wrongdoer. In addition, I address pertinent sections of the Act that infringe on the claimant's right to redress. Part IV presents constitutional challenges to the Act, relying specifically on the Florida Constitution, Article I, Section 2 (Equal Protection Clause), Section 21 (right of access to the courts), and Section 22 (right to a jury trial). Finally, Part V suggests proposals for revisions of the Act, specifically focusing on the claimant's right to redress and access to our justice system.

Recommended Citation

Jessica Fonseca-Nader, Florida's Comprehensive Medical Malpractice Reform Act: Is It Time for a Change, 8 St. Thomas L. Rev. 551 (1996).
Available at: https://scholarship.stu.edu/stlr/vol8/iss3/5