Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc. v. Rouse
In a medical negligence case referred to court-ordered nonbinding arbitration, Dr. Regan and Lawnwood filed their motion for trial de novo two days beyond rule 1.820(h)'s twenty-day deadline and abandoned any excusable-neglect argument, instead urging 'substantial compliance' based on post-arbitration settlement and mediation communications. Sitting en banc, the Fourth DCA affirmed entry of a $6.5 million judgment conforming to the arbitration decision, receded from Nicholson-Kenny Capital Management, Inc. v. Steinberg and its 'some notice' exception, and held section 44.103(5) and rule 1.820(h) impose a mandatory, bright-line filing requirement.
Key facts
- Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc. and Dr. Regan appealed entry of a $6.5 million judgment conforming to a nonbinding arbitration decision after they failed to file a motion for trial de novo within the twenty-day deadline imposed by section 44.103(5) and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820(h).
- The appellants filed their motion for trial de novo two days late and did not assert excusable neglect; instead, they argued 'substantial compliance' based on post-arbitration settlement and mediation communications with the opposing party.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This en banc decision eliminates the 'substantial compliance'/estoppel escape hatch for missing the twenty-day trial de novo deadline after court-ordered nonbinding arbitration in the Fourth District, certifies conflict… — 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.