SHELIA T. POWELL v. JOHN ARGYLE GILMORE SAMPSON, M.D.
This text of SHELIA T. POWELL v. JOHN ARGYLE GILMORE SAMPSON, M.D. (SHELIA T. POWELL v. JOHN ARGYLE GILMORE SAMPSON, M.D.) 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.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed October 20, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D20-1082 Lower Tribunal No. 19-36863 ________________
Shelia T. Powell, Appellant,
vs.
John Argyle Gilmore Sampson, M.D., et al., Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Alan Fine, Judge.
Alexander Appellate Law P.A., and Samuel Alexander (DeLand), for appellant.
Lalchandani Simon PL, and Kubs Lalchandani and Daniel E. Davis; Lubell & Rosen, LLC, and Ryan M. Sanders (Fort Lauderdale), for appellees.
Before LOGUE, SCALES and LINDSEY, JJ.
PER CURIAM. Shelia T. Powell, the plaintiff below, appeals a June 30, 2020 final
order dismissing her medical malpractice complaint against the defendants
below, appellees John Argyle Gilmore Sampson, M.D. and Seduction
Cosmetic Center Corp. d/b/a Seduction by Jardon’s Cosmetic. After Powell
filed her medical malpractice complaint below, the appellees filed their
“Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for Failure to Comply with the
Medical Malpractice Presuit Requirements.” At the subsequent non-
evidentiary hearing on the motion to dismiss, the trial court, over the
objection of Powell’s counsel that an evidentiary hearing was required to
adjudicate the motion, heard and granted the motion. Because, on this
record, the trial court should have afforded the parties an evidentiary hearing
to determine whether Powell “complied with the reasonable presuit
investigation requirements of chapter 766,” Holden v. Bober, 39 So. 3d 396,
403 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); § 766.206, Fla. Stat. (2019), we reverse the
challenged dismissal order and remand for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
SHELIA T. POWELL v. JOHN ARGYLE GILMORE SAMPSON, M.D., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shelia-t-powell-v-john-argyle-gilmore-sampson-md-fladistctapp-2021.