Curtis Gorham v. Dr. Gary H. Lavine, Dr. Emily D. Billingsley, Kendrea Virgil, RN, Lloyd G. Logue, Donna Baird, Joseph R. Impicciche (CEO), Junco Emergency Physicians, Bay County Health System, LLC, Daniel Cousin, PayPal, Inc., and State of Florida

Summary

The Florida First District Court of Appeal consolidated three appeals arising from Curtis Gorham's medical-malpractice-related litigation. The court affirmed dismissals of claims against the retained expert and certain physicians, dismissed challenges to nonappealable or premature orders, and dismissed one appeal as untimely. The court also warned Gorham that further abusive or noncompliant filings could result in sanctions, including dismissal or a restriction on appearing before the court.

Holdings

1. The order dismissing with prejudice all claims against the retained expert was final and appealable, and the challenge to the use of Gorham's personal email address in the order was meritless because it was unsupported by legal authority.
2. An order cancelling pending hearings is a procedural order that is not appealable.
3. A dismissal without prejudice is not appealable unless the order makes clear that any further proceedings must be brought in a separate action.
4. An order granting a motion to dismiss with prejudice is not final and appealable when it does not contain final language actually dismissing the claims or case.
5. The dismissal with prejudice of the claims against Dr. Billingsley and Lloyd G. Logue was affirmed where Gorham undisputedly failed to comply with medical-malpractice presuit requirements and the time to satisfy those requirements had expired, barring the action under the statute of limitations.
6. Case No. 1D2023-1518 was dismissed because it challenged the same nonappealable scheduling order and the notice of appeal was untimely.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the order dismissing with prejudice all claims against Gorham's retained expert was valid and appealable.
2. Whether an order cancelling pending hearings was appealable.
3. Whether a dismissal without prejudice of claims against PayPal was ripe for appeal.
4. Whether an order granting a motion to dismiss with prejudice, without final language actually dismissing the claims against Bay County Health System, LLC, was final and appealable.
5. Whether the dismissal with prejudice of claims against Dr. Billingsley and Lloyd G. Logue should be affirmed where Gorham failed to comply with medical-malpractice presuit requirements and the limitations period had expired.
6. Whether the appeal in Case No. 1D2023-1518 was timely and properly taken from an appealable order.

Disposition

other