Santaella v. Vaz
In a medical malpractice/wrongful death suit alleging the defendant physician practiced while suffering cognitive decline, the trial court ordered a compulsory medical examination of the defendant doctor under rule 1.360. The Third District denied certiorari, holding the defendant's cognitive condition at the time of the alleged malpractice was 'in controversy' and that the order's detailed limits on the telehealth exam satisfied Espinosa's requirement that scope be defined before finding good cause.
Key facts
- Plaintiff filed a medical malpractice and wrongful death suit against a physician, alleging the defendant continued practicing while suffering from cognitive decline.
- The trial court ordered the defendant physician to submit to a compulsory medical examination under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.360, consisting of a neurological evaluation via telehealth with specified time limits and restrictions on questioning.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
The opinion gives practitioners a concrete template of what a rule 1.360 order must contain to survive certiorari under Espinosa — modality, time caps, subject-matter exclusions, and attendance/recording rights. It is… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
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.