In re: Amendment to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130
Following a comment period on its earlier sua sponte amendment, the Florida Supreme Court further amended Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(H) to add a cross-reference to section 766.102(12), Florida Statutes, because that subsection also addresses the qualifications of a corroborating expert witness. As amended, orders denying a motion to dismiss based on the qualifications of a corroborating expert witness under sections 766.102(5)-(9) and (12) are immediately appealable nonfinal orders. Justice Labarga dissented, objecting to the Court's practice of adopting significant rule amendments on its own motion with a retroactive comment period.
Key facts
- The Florida Supreme Court amended Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(H) sua sponte to add a cross-reference to section 766.102(12), Florida Statutes, regarding qualifications of corroborating expert witnesses in medical malpractice cases.
- The amendment expands the categories of nonfinal orders that are immediately appealable to include orders denying motions to dismiss based on expert witness qualifications under both subsections 766.102(5)-(9) and the newly added subsection (12).
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Medical malpractice defense counsel gain a broader interlocutory route to challenge presuit corroborating expert affidavits: denial of a motion to dismiss grounded in expert qualifications under section 766.102(12)… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.