Recent Posts
- Thought-provoking article re meaning of legal conservatismThe Danger of Trump’s Clash with the Conservative Legal MovementArticle Source FOR…
- Interesting liberal piece mentioning Federalist Society role in Federal judicial pipelineSource: The smartest people in Trumpland – ThinkProgress All of this drama…
- Scalia’s greatest strength, his steadfastness, was also his greatest weakness – The Washington PostI do not agree that his steadfastness as described in the article…
Florida Practice Areas
- Appellate Law
- Charter School Law
- Procurements & Bid Protests
- Professional & Occupational Licensing & Discipline
- Constitutional Law
- Education Law
- School Choice Law
- Business and Civil Litigation
- General Counsel Services
- Election and Campaign Law
- Ethics, Public Records, and Government in the Sunshine Law
- Other Practice Areas
Legal Disclaimer
1st DCA Case denying request for cert review of a MSJ denial predicated on statute of limitations
In an opinion issued today in Abbey v. Patrick, the First District denied a cert petition request from a doctor who claimed he had a valid statute of limitations defense against a medical negligence suit. The Court held that this was not an extraordinary case deserving of cert review, and did not reach the merits of whether there was a valid statute of limitations defense. The Court may have been correct that this was not an extraordinary case that cannot be corrected on direct appeal, but one wonders whether the legislature may want to visit this type of case. The practical result of this ruling, assuming there is a valid statute of limitations defense, will be either putting the defense to the cost of a full trial, a cost they will probably never recover even if they later prevail on appeal, or raising the cost and risk of proceeding so much that a settlement is reached because of the plaintiff’s renewed leverage. Perhaps, particularly in cases in which there are no material facts in dispute, so that the case is ripe for summary judgment, it would be much more efficient to allow a direct interlocutory appeal from a denial of a motion for summary judgment.
Blog Archive
- June 2025 (1)
- August 2017 (1)
- February 2016 (3)
- December 2015 (1)
- December 2014 (1)
- May 2012 (1)
- September 2011 (1)
- August 2011 (1)
- January 2011 (3)
- December 2010 (1)
- October 2010 (2)
- September 2010 (3)
- July 2010 (1)
- June 2010 (1)
- May 2010 (3)
- March 2010 (2)
- December 2009 (3)
- November 2009 (3)
- October 2009 (5)
- September 2009 (12)
- August 2009 (1)

