In Re: Amendment to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130
Date Filed2023-12-14
DocketSC2023-0701
Cited0 times
StatusPublished
Full Opinion (html_with_citations)
Supreme Court of Florida
____________
No. SC2023-0701
____________
IN RE: AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA RULE OF APPELLATE
PROCEDURE 9.130.
December 14, 2023
PER CURIAM.
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.
MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, COURIEL, GROSSHANS, FRANCIS,
and SASSO, JJ., concur.
LABARGA, J., dissents with an opinion.
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER
THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS AMENDMENT.
LABARGA, J., dissenting.
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
-2-
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.
Original Proceeding – Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure
Elaine D. Walter, Chair, Appellate Court Rules Committee, Miami,
Florida, Joshua E. Doyle, Executive Director, The Florida Bar,
Tallahassee, Florida, and Heather Savage Telfer, Bar Liaison, The
Florida Bar, Tallahassee, Florida; Jordan A. Dulcie of Searcy,
Denney, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, P.A., West Palm Beach,
Florida; and George Pavlidakey, Clearwater, Florida,
Responding with comments
-3-
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]
-4-