In Re: Amendment to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130
Supreme Court of Florida
In Re: Amendment to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130
Opinion
Supreme Court of Florida
____________
No. SC2023-0701
____________
IN RE: AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA RULE OF APPELLATE
PROCEDURE 9.130.
July 6, 2023
PER CURIAM.
The Court, on its own motion, amends Florida Rule of
Appellate Procedure 9.130 (Proceedings to Review Nonfinal Orders
and Specified Final Orders). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, §
2(a), Fla. Const.; Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.140(d).
In a concurrent opinion, we held that the First District Court
of Appeal did not have the authority to perform certiorari review of a
trial court’s denial of a motion to dismiss a medical malpractice
action under chapter 766, Florida Statutes. Univ. of Fla. Bd. of Trs.
v. Carmody, No. SC2022-0068 (Fla. July 6, 2023). However, we
acknowledged that “the Medical Malpractice Act changed the law
such that an interlocutory remedy for parties facing claims that fail
to satisfy its presuit requirements is warranted.” Id. at 3.
Accordingly, we now amend Florida Rule of Appellate
Procedure 9.130(a)(3) to provide for interlocutory review of nonfinal
orders that deny a motion to dismiss on the basis of the
qualifications of a corroborating witness under subsections
766.102(5)-(9), Florida Statutes. We identify subsections (5)-(9)
because those are the subsections that articulate the qualifications
of a corroborating expert witness. And we amend the rule to
provide for interlocutory review only when these particular motions
to dismiss are denied, as an order granting such a motion to
dismiss would as a general matter result in the plaintiff’s case being
dismissed without prejudice. See Morgan v. Blancher, 489 So. 2d
1217, 1218 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (“An order of dismissal with leave to
amend is not appealable because it is a nonfinal order.”).
We amend rule 9.130 as reflected in the appendix to this
opinion. New language is indicated by underscoring; deletions are
indicated by struck-through type. The amendments shall become
effective immediately. Because the amendments were not published
for comment previously, interested persons shall have seventy-five
-2-
days from the date of this opinion in which to file comments with
the Court. 1
It is so ordered.
MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, COURIEL, GROSSHANS, and
FRANCIS, JJ., concur.
LABARGA, J., dissents with an opinion.
SASSO, J., did not participate.
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER
THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS.
LABARGA, J., dissenting.
I respectfully dissent to the majority’s decision to amend
Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130 on its own motion. This
amendment will permit interlocutory review of nonfinal orders that
deny motions to dismiss on the basis of the qualifications of a
1. All comments must be filed with the Court on or before
September 19, 2023, as well as a separate request for oral
argument if the person filing the comment wishes to participate in
oral argument, which may be scheduled in this case. If filed by an
attorney in good standing with The Florida Bar, the comment must
be electronically filed via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal (Portal).
If filed by a nonlawyer or a lawyer not licensed to practice in
Florida, the comment may be, but is not required to be, filed via the
Portal. Any person unable to submit a comment electronically must
mail or hand-deliver the originally signed comment to the Florida
Supreme Court, Office of the Clerk, 500 South Duval Street,
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1927; no additional copies are required
or will be accepted.
-3-
corroborating witness in medical malpractice cases. A rule change
of this magnitude should be referred to the appropriate committee
for consideration and recommendations prior to its adoption.
Original Proceeding – Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure
-4-
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)-(E) [No Change]
(F) deny a motion that:
(i)-(ii) [No Change]
(iii) asserts entitlement to sovereign
immunity; or
(G) grant or deny a motion for leave to amend to
assert a claim for punitive damages.; or
(H) deny a motion to dismiss on the basis of the
qualifications of a corroborating expert witness under subsections
766.102(5)-(9), Florida Statutes.
(4)-(5) [No Change]
(b)-(i) [No Change]
Committee Notes
[No Change]
-5-
Reference
- Status
- Published