Farina v. Zann

609 So. 2d 629, 1992 WL 203843
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 26, 1992
Docket90-3308
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 609 So. 2d 629 (Farina v. Zann) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Farina v. Zann, 609 So. 2d 629, 1992 WL 203843 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

609 So.2d 629 (1992)

Diane FARINA and John Farina, Appellants,
v.
Gregory J. ZANN, M.D., and Gregory J. Zann, M.D., P.A., Appellees.

No. 90-3308.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

August 26, 1992.
Rehearing Denied as Moot November 3, 1992.

Nancy Little Hoffman of Nancy Little Hoffman P.A., and Angelo Marino, Jr. of Marino & Goodman, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

Karl L. Santone and Vanessa A. Reynolds of Santone & Eyler, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and agree with appellants that they were entitled to an instruction on the law set out in Stuart v. Hertz Corp., 351 So.2d 703 (Fla. 1977), that a tortfeasor will be held responsible for damages of the victim resulting from negligent medical treatment rendered by reason of the original wrongful act.

The appellants' claim was predicated on allegations that Mrs. Farina's physician, Dr. Gregory J. Zann, was negligent in his diagnosis and treatment. It was claimed that a series of subsequent surgeries and treatments, including the negative consequences thereof, would not have occurred, but for Dr. Zann's earlier negligent diagnosis *630 and treatment. At trial there was proof and argument by the defense that Mrs. Farina's most serious injuries resulted from the actions or inactions of other physicians, rather than the neglect of Dr. Zann. Under these circumstances, the appellants were entitled to an instruction under the law of Stuart. See Davidson v. Gaillard, 584 So.2d 71 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 591 So.2d 181, 591 So.2d 182 (Fla. 1991).

We reject the argument that the error was rendered harmless by application of the two issue rule set out in Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Scarbrough, 355 So.2d 1181 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), approved 381 So.2d 1355 (Fla. 1980). See LoBue v. Travelers Ins. Co., 388 So.2d 1349 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980), rev. denied, 397 So.2d 777 (Fla. 1981).

We find no reversible error in the other issues raised. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions for a new trial and other proceedings in accord herewith.

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., ANSTEAD, J., and HOY, JOHN J., Associate Judge, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Charlemagne v. Francis
700 So. 2d 157 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Haas v. Zaccaria
659 So. 2d 1130 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Barrios v. Darrach
629 So. 2d 211 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
609 So. 2d 629, 1992 WL 203843, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farina-v-zann-fladistctapp-1992.