← Case library
M.D. Fla.August 18, 2026Motion to Strike Granted⭐ Notable

Montonye v. United States of America

Case No. 3:23-cv-254-WWB-MCR

In an FTCA medical negligence/wrongful death case alleging delayed lung cancer diagnosis by a family medicine physician, the plaintiff moved to strike the Government's pulmonologist standard-of-care expert. The court held that under Fed. R. Evid. 601 Florida's expert competency statute governs, and that section 766.102(8)'s 'similar health care provider' route cannot be used to qualify an expert to testify about the standard of care applicable to a specialist after the 2013 amendments requiring the 'same specialty.'

Key facts

  • Plaintiff brought a Federal Tort Claims Act medical negligence and wrongful death case against the United States, alleging a family medicine physician delayed diagnosing lung cancer.
  • Plaintiff moved to strike the Government's pulmonologist expert who was offered to testify about the standard of care applicable to the family medicine physician defendant.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

This order squarely resolves a recurring argument in Florida medical malpractice practice: whether section 766.102(8) can rescue an out-of-specialty expert who happens to specialize in the condition at issue. The court… — full analysis with a trial

Best value · free

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
Start my free 30-day trial → No credit card required
👀 Take a quick tour of the site → 60 seconds · click a real case · no login

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.