In theory, Florida's medical malpractice laws are designed to balance the interests of healthcare providers and patients. One notable aspect of these laws is the provision for voluntary binding arbitration, outlined in Florida Statute 766.207. This statute attempts to streamline the resolution of medical negligence claims, offering an alternative to lengthy and costly court battles. In this blog post, we will delve into the key components of F.S. 766.207, exploring how it works, its benefits, and its potential drawbacks.
What is Voluntary Binding Arbitration?
Voluntary binding arbitration, as described in F.S. 766.207, is a process where both parties in a medical negligence dispute agree to resolve their differences outside of court. Unlike mediation, where the mediator facilitates negotiation without imposing a decision, binding arbitration involves an arbitrator (or a panel of arbitrators) who listens to both sides and then makes a binding decision on the case. This decision is final and typically not subject to appeal.
Key Provisions of F.S. 766.207
-
Mutual Agreement: For arbitration to proceed under F.S. 766.207, both the claimant (patient) and the defendant (healthcare provider) must agree to participate. This mutual consent is crucial, as arbitration cannot be unilaterally imposed.
-
Limitations on Damages: One of the most significant aspects of F.S. 766.207 is the cap on non-economic damages. Non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering, are limited to $250,000 per incident.
-
Claimed Expedited Process: Proponents of arbitration claim that the arbitration process is designed to be faster than traditional litigation. If it works as intended, this expedited process helps parties reach a resolution more quickly, reducing the emotional and financial toll of prolonged litigation.
-
Binding Decision: The arbitrator's decision is binding and enforceable in the same manner as a court judgment. This finality brings certainty to both parties, as they can avoid the uncertainty of a jury trial and potential appeals.
-
Attorney Fees and Costs: F.S. 766.207 includes provisions for paymemt of a portion of the claimant's attorney fees and costs by the healthcare provider.
Potential Drawbacks of Voluntary Binding Arbitration
- Limitation on Damages: The cap on non-economic damages may be seen as unfair by some claimants, particularly in cases involving severe injury or loss.
- Finality: The binding nature of arbitration means that the parties may not be able to appeal the decision, which could be a disadvantage if one party believes the arbitrator made an error.
- Mandatory Participation: While arbitration under F.S. 766.207 requires mutual consent, once agreed upon, the parties must abide by the arbitrator's decision, which may not always align with their expectations.
Conclusion
F.S. 766.207 offers an alternative to traditional litigation for resolving medical negligence claims in Florida. However, it is essential for both parties to fully understand the implications of arbitration, including the limitations on damages and the binding nature of the process, before agreeing to participate. As with any legal matter, consulting with an experienced attorney can provide valuable guidance tailored to the specifics of the case.
You can reach Hospital and Medical Malpractice Lawyer J.P. Gonzalez-Sirgo by dialing his direct number at (786) 272-5841, calling the main office at (305) 461-1095, or Toll Free at 1 (866) 71-CLAIM or email Attorney Gonzalez-Sirgo directly at [email protected] or by text at (305) 929-8935.
