Full Opinion

SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________ Case No. 6D2026-1810 Lower Tribunal No. 2025-CA-007690 _____________________________ HALIFAX HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER d/b/a HALIFAX HEALTH and MEDICAL CENTER OF DELTONA, INC., Petitioners v. UNITEDHEALTHCARE OF FLORIDA, INC., Respondent. _____________________________ Petition for Review of an Order Excluding Press and Public to the Circuit Court of Orange County. Patricia J. Strowbridge, Judge. November 6, 2026 NARDELLA, J. This action was filed by Halifax Hospital Medical Center (“Halifax”) to confirm a final arbitration award. During the proceeding, Halifax and the opposing party, UnitedHealthcare of Florida, Inc. (“United”), disagreed over whether the award should be filed under seal. The trial court resolved the disagreement in United’s favor and, thus, sealed the entire award. Halifax now petitions this Court pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100(d) for a writ quashing the order sealing the award. A petition filed pursuant to rule 9.100(d) is reviewed under the same standard as a petition for writ of certiorari. Miami Herald Media Co. v. State, 218 So. 3d 460, 462 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (applying certiorari standard when reviewing petition filed pursuant to rule 9.100(d)); Lake v. State, 193 So. 3d 932, 932 n.1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (same); Times Publ’g Co. v. State, 903 So. 2d 322, 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (same). Under this standard, a petitioner must first demonstrate that the interlocutory order will cause them material injury for the remainder of the case that cannot be remedied on direct appeal. State v. Garcia, 350 So. 3d 322, 325 (Fla. 2022). Here, since Halifax is a party to the action and has complete access to the award despite it being sealed, it has not shown that it will suffer a material injury that cannot be remedied on direct appeal. Therefore, the petition is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. DISMISSED. STARGEL and BROWNLEE, JJ., concur. Samuel Alexander, of Alexander Appellate Law, P.A., Jacksonville, for Petitioners. Andrew R. Sperl and Sean S. Zabaneh, of Duane Morris LLP, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Pro Hac Vice, for Petitioners. Eric Yesner and Daniel Alter, of GrayRobinson, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, and John A. Boudet, of GrayRobinson, P.A., Orlando, for Respondent. Eric Y. Choi and Scott J. Fisher, of Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP, Chicago, Illinois, Pro Hac Vice, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED 2