Nardone v. Reynolds

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reviews a summary judgment holding a Florida medical malpractice action barred by the statute of limitations. Accepting the Florida Supreme Court’s certified answers concerning the discovery rule and fraudulent concealment, the court holds that the limitations period may be tolled when a physician fails to disclose a known or reasonably knowable condition or cause, including after termination of the doctor-patient relationship. The court vacates and remands for a defendant-by-defendant factual determination concerning the duty to disclose and tolling.

Holdings

1. The certified answers foreclosed the previously decided limitations issues but did not require affirmance of the entire summary judgment because the record left unresolved whether any defendant knew or reasonably could have discovered the cause of Nicholas's condition and failed to disclose it.
2. The consequences of a physician's breach of the duty to disclose a condition or cause known during the doctor-patient relationship do not expire merely because the doctor-patient relationship terminates.
3. The fiduciary relationship and accompanying duty to disclose may exist for physicians involved in treating the patient regardless of whether the patient knew the physician or had direct contact with that physician.
4. Summary judgment as a conclusive judgment that all claims were barred by limitations was improper because the record did not establish, as to every defendant, whether the defendant knew or had reasonable grounds to know the relevant condition or cause and failed to disclose it.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Florida Supreme Court's answers concerning the discovery rule and the commencement of the medical-malpractice limitations period required affirmance of the entire summary judgment.
2. Whether a physician's fiduciary duty to disclose a known or reasonably discoverable cause of a patient's adverse condition tolls the Florida statute of limitations when the physician fails to disclose that cause.
3. Whether the duty to disclose and resulting tolling end automatically when the doctor-patient relationship terminates.
4. Whether the fiduciary duty applies to physicians involved in a patient's treatment even when the patient did not know the physician personally or have direct contact with that physician.
5. Whether the record presented a triable issue concerning each defendant's knowledge of the condition or cause and failure to disclose it.

Disposition

vacated