Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc. v. Cassimally

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc. v. Cassimally

471 So. 2d 1346, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1579, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14873

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 26, 1985

DocketNo. 84-1702

StatusPublished

This text of 471 So. 2d 1346 (Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc. v. Cassimally) 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

Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc. v. Cassimally, 471 So. 2d 1346, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1579, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14873 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Reversed. We reverse on the grounds that mandamus was not an appropriate remedy. See State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Hartsfield, 399 So.2d 1019 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). The appellee, a physician on the staff of the appellant hospital sought to compel the appellant to conduct an election meeting of the medical staff in order to elect medical staff officers in accord with the medical staff by-laws. The underlying dispute below involves a decision by the appellant corporation to temporarily appoint medical staff officers in the face of internal political problems which were allegedly proving disruptive to the proper operation of the hospital. It is undisputed on this record that the appellant corporation retains authority to control the medical staff by-laws and to veto the election of medical staff officers. That being so, we do not believe the appellee has demonstrated a clear legal right to compel the election of officers in accord with the preexisting medical staff by-laws. There is, of course, no reason why the medical staff itself cannot meet and elect officers and then have a judicial determination as to which set of officers are entitled to preside. The right to have such a dispute resolved, however, does not mean that a member of the medical staff has the right to invoke the extraordinary remedy of mandamus to resolve the dispute.

ANSTEAD, C.J., and HERSEY and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Reversed. We reverse on the grounds that mandamus was not an appropriate remedy. See State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Hartsfield, 399 So.2d 1019 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). The appellee, a physician on the staff of the appellant hospital sought to compel the appellant to conduct an election meeting of the medical staff in order to elect medical staff officers in accord with the medical staff by-laws. The underlying dispute below involves a decision by the appellant corporation to temporarily appoint medical staff officers in the face of internal political problems which were allegedly proving disruptive to the proper operation of the hospital. It is undisputed on this record that the appellant corporation retains authority to control the medical staff by-laws and to veto the election of medical staff officers. That being so, we do not believe the appellee has demonstrated a clear legal right to compel the election of officers in accord with the preexisting medical staff by-laws. There is, of course, no reason why the medical staff itself cannot meet and elect officers and then have a judicial determination as to which set of officers are entitled to preside. The right to have such a dispute resolved, however, does not mean that a member of the medical staff has the right to invoke the extraordinary remedy of mandamus to resolve the dispute.

ANSTEAD, C.J., and HERSEY and DELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

471 So. 2d 1346, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1579, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawnwood-medical-center-inc-v-cassimally-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack