Florida Statute 395.0193 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXIX
PUBLIC HEALTH

Chapter 395
HOSPITAL LICENSING AND REGULATION

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 395.0193

395.0193 Licensed facilities; peer review; disciplinary powers; agency or partnership with physicians.—

(1) It is the intent of the Legislature that good faith participants in the process of investigating and disciplining physicians pursuant to the state-mandated peer review process shall, in addition to receiving immunity from retaliatory tort suits pursuant to s. 456.073(12), be protected from federal antitrust suits filed under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 15 U.S.C.A. ss. 1 et seq. Such intent is within the public policy of the state to secure the provision of quality medical services to the public.

(2) Each licensed facility, as a condition of licensure, shall provide for peer review of physicians who deliver health care services at the facility. Each licensed facility shall develop written, binding procedures by which such peer review shall be conducted. Such procedures shall include:

(a) Mechanism for choosing the membership of the body or bodies that conduct peer review.

(b) Adoption of rules of order for the peer review process.

(d) Mechanism to identify and avoid conflict of interest on the part of the peer review panel members.

(e) Recording of agendas and minutes which do not contain confidential material, for review by the Division of Health Quality Assurance of the agency.

(f) Review, at least annually, of the peer review procedures by the governing board of the licensed facility.

(g) Focus of the peer review process on review of professional practices at the facility to reduce morbidity and mortality and to improve patient care.

(3) If reasonable belief exists that conduct by a staff member or physician who delivers health care services at the licensed facility may constitute one or more grounds for discipline as provided in this subsection, a peer review panel shall investigate and determine whether grounds for discipline exist with respect to such staff member or physician. The governing board of any licensed facility, after considering the recommendations of its peer review panel, shall suspend, deny, revoke, or curtail the privileges, or reprimand, counsel, or require education, of any such staff member or physician after a final determination has been made that one or more of the following grounds exist:

(a) Incompetence.

(b) Being found to be a habitual user of intoxicants or drugs to the extent that he or she is deemed dangerous to himself, herself, or others.

(d) Being found liable by a court of competent jurisdiction for medical negligence or malpractice involving negligent conduct.

(e) One or more settlements exceeding $10,000 for medical negligence or malpractice involving negligent conduct by the staff member.

(f) Medical negligence other than as specified in paragraph (d) or paragraph (e).

(g) Failure to comply with the policies, procedures, or directives of the risk management program or any quality assurance committees of any licensed facility.

(4) Pursuant to ss. 458.337 and 459.016, any disciplinary actions taken under subsection (3) shall be reported in writing to the Division of Health Quality Assurance of the agency within 30 working days after its initial occurrence, regardless of the pendency of appeals to the governing board of the hospital. The notification shall identify the disciplined practitioner, the action taken, and the reason for such action. All final disciplinary actions taken under subsection (3), if different from those which were reported to the agency within 30 days after the initial occurrence, shall be reported within 10 working days to the Division of Health Quality Assurance of the agency in writing and shall specify the disciplinary action taken and the specific grounds therefor. The division shall review each report and determine whether it potentially involved conduct by the licensee that is subject to disciplinary action, in which case s. 456.073 shall apply. The reports are not subject to inspection under s. 119.07(1) even if the division’s investigation results in a finding of probable cause.

(5) There shall be no monetary liability on the part of, and no cause of action for damages against, any licensed facility, its governing board or governing board members, peer review panel, medical staff, or disciplinary body, or its agents, investigators, witnesses, or employees; a committee of a hospital; or any other person, for any action taken without intentional fraud in carrying out the provisions of this section.

(6) For a single incident or series of isolated incidents that are nonwillful violations of the reporting requirements of this section or part II of chapter 408, the agency shall first seek to obtain corrective action by the facility. If correction is not demonstrated within the timeframe established by the agency or if there is a pattern of nonwillful violations of this section or part II of chapter 408, the agency may impose an administrative fine, not to exceed $5,000 for any violation of the reporting requirements of this section or part II of chapter 408. The administrative fine for repeated nonwillful violations may not exceed $10,000 for any violation. The administrative fine for each intentional and willful violation may not exceed $25,000 per violation, per day. The fine for an intentional and willful violation of this section or part II of chapter 408 may not exceed $250,000. In determining the amount of fine to be levied, the agency shall be guided by s. 395.1065(2)(b).

(7) The proceedings and records of peer review panels, committees, and governing boards or agent thereof which relate solely to actions taken in carrying out this section are not subject to inspection under s. 119.07(1); and meetings held pursuant to achieving the objectives of such panels, committees, and governing boards are not open to the public under the provisions of chapter 286.

(8) The investigations, proceedings, and records of the peer review panel, a committee of a hospital, a disciplinary board, or a governing board, or agent thereof with whom there is a specific written contract for that purpose, as described in this section shall not be subject to discovery or introduction into evidence in any civil or administrative action against a provider of professional health services arising out of the matters which are the subject of evaluation and review by such group or its agent, and a person who was in attendance at a meeting of such group or its agent may not be permitted or required to testify in any such civil or administrative action as to any evidence or other matters produced or presented during the proceedings of such group or its agent or as to any findings, recommendations, evaluations, opinions, or other actions of such group or its agent or any members thereof. However, information, documents, or records otherwise available from original sources are not to be construed as immune from discovery or use in any such civil or administrative action merely because they were presented during proceedings of such group, and any person who testifies before such group or who is a member of such group may not be prevented from testifying as to matters within his or her knowledge, but such witness may not be asked about his or her testimony before such a group or opinions formed by him or her as a result of such group hearings.

(9)(a) If the defendant prevails in an action brought by a staff member or physician who delivers health care services at the licensed facility against any person or entity that initiated, participated in, was a witness in, or conducted any review as authorized by this section, the court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to the defendant.

(b) As a condition of any staff member or physician bringing any action against any person or entity that initiated, participated in, was a witness in, or conducted any review as authorized by this section and before any responsive pleading is due, the staff member or physician shall post a bond or other security, as set by the court having jurisdiction of the action, in an amount sufficient to pay the costs and attorney’s fees.

(10)(a) A hospital’s compliance with the requirements of this chapter or s. 766.110(1) may not be the sole basis to establish an agency or partnership relationship between the hospital and physicians who provide services within the hospital.

(b) A hospital may create an agency relationship with a physician by written contract signed by the hospital and:

1. The physician;

2. A health care professional association; or

3. A corporate medical group and its employees.

A written contract is not the exclusive means to establish an agency or partnership relationship between a hospital and any other person described in this paragraph.

History.—ss. 26, 30, ch. 82-182; s. 1, ch. 82-402; s. 3, ch. 85-175; s. 3, ch. 88-1; s. 2, ch. 88-277; s. 4, ch. 89-162; s. 14, ch. 90-344; ss. 12, 13, 98, ch. 92-289; s. 726, ch. 95-148; s. 213, ch. 96-406; s. 24, ch. 98-89; s. 21, ch. 98-166; s. 13, ch. 2000-160; s. 43, ch. 2007-230.

Note.—Former s. 395.0115.

F.S. 395.0193 on Google Scholar

F.S. 395.0193 on Casetext

Amendments to 395.0193

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 395.0193

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 395.0193.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 395.0193

Total Results: 20

Philip Regala, M.D., Philip Regala, M.D. P.L., F/K/A Philip Regala, M.D., P.A. and v. Michael McDonald

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-09-06

Snippet: largely be protected by sections 395.0191(8), 395.0193(8), and 766.101(5), Florida Statutes (2022) (collectively

JOSEPH CASTELLANO, M. D. v. DAVID HALPERN, M. D.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2023-12-29

Snippet: privileged and confidential under sections 395.0191(8), 395.0193(8), and 766.101(5),1 Florida Statutes (2021),

JOSEPH CASTELLANO, M. D. v. DAVID HALPERN, M. D.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2023-12-29

Snippet: privileged and confidential under sections 395.0191(8), 395.0193(8), and 766.101(5),1 Florida Statutes (2021),

JOSEPH CASTELLANO, M. D. v. DAVID HALPERN, M. D. AND WEST FLORIDA-MHT, LLC D/ B/ A HCA FLORIDA SOUTH TAMPA HOSPITAL

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2023-12-29

Snippet: privileged and confidential under sections 395.0191(8), 395.0193(8), and 766.101(5),1 Florida Statutes (2021),

SOUTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT d/b/a MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM v. DAVID M. FELDBAUM, M.D.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-06-02

Snippet: credentialing discovery immunities in section 395.0193(8), Florida Statutes (2020), and provided the

STEVEN PAUL ANDERSON v. MARY MITCHELL

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-04-05

Snippet: that provide a hybrid of the two. See, e.g., §§ 395.0193(8), Fla. Stat. (2017) (providing that certain

Hakki v. Galencare, Inc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-01-31

Citation: 237 So. 3d 440

Snippet: the suit pursuant to sections 395.0191(7) and 395.0193(5), Florida Statutes (2010), because Dr. Hakki's

Amber Edwards v. Larry D. Thomas, M.D.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-10-26

Citation: 229 So. 3d 277

Snippet: established, regular operation.’).”); see generally § 395.0193, Fla. Stat. (2017) (requiring licensed health

Desai v. Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-05-31

Citation: 219 So. 3d 869, 2017 WL 2350138, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 7831

Snippet: recommendation .to the- medical executive committee. § 395.0193(2), Fla. Stat. (2009). The medical executive committee

Figueroa v. Hynes

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2015-12-11

Citation: 200 So. 3d 98, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 18484, 2015 WL 8483919

Snippet: review proceedings under Florida law. Section 395.0193, Florida Statutes, provides that “[e]ach licensed

Bartow HMA, LLC v. Kirkland

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2015-07-31

Citation: 171 So. 3d 783, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 11561, 2015 WL 4621323

Snippet: discovery protections set forth in sections 395.0191, 395.0193, 395.0197, and 766.101 [.(Florida Statutes (2012))

Bartow HMA, LLC v. Edwards

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2015-07-10

Citation: 175 So. 3d 820, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 10493, 2015 WL 4154180

Snippet: hospital facilities. See §§ 395.0191(8), 395.0193(8), 766.101(5), Fla. Stat. (2010); W. Fla

Bartow HMA, LLC v. Kirkland

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2013-11-15

Citation: 126 So. 3d 1247, 2013 WL 6050895, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 18154

Snippet: discovery protections set forth in sections 395.0191, 395.0193, 395.0197, and 766.101 to the extent that documents

City of Freeport v. Beach Community Bank

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2013-02-18

Citation: 108 So. 3d 684, 2013 WL 598417, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 2509

Snippet: denying immunity from suit pursuant to section 395.0193(5), Florida Statutes); Seminole Tribe of Fla.

West Florida Regional Medical Center, Inc. v. See

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2012-01-12

Citation: 79 So. 3d 1, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 22, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 55, 2012 WL 87282

Snippet: credentialing materials embodied in sections 395.0191, 395.0193, 395.0197, 766.101, and 766.1016, Florida Statutes

Miami-Dade County v. Rodriguez

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2011-08-31

Citation: 67 So. 3d 1213, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 13791, 2011 WL 3820715

Snippet: 914, 917 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (“Since subsection 395.0193(5) [affording immunity from suit to licensed hospital

Lawnwood Medical Center Inc. v. Sadow

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2010-03-24

Citation: 43 So. 3d 710, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 3813, 2010 WL 1066833

Snippet: thoracic aortic dissections and aneurysms. . § 395.0193, Fla. Stat. (1998) (each licensed facility shall

West Florida Regional Medical Center, Inc. v. See

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2009-09-25

Citation: 18 So. 3d 676, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 14400, 2009 WL 3047396

Snippet: civil litigation, including sections 395.0191(8), 395.0193(8), and 766.101(5). Petitioner's claims of privilege

Columbia Hospital Corp. of South Broward v. Fain

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2009-08-19

Citation: 16 So. 3d 236, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 11600, 2009 WL 2516917

Snippet: were expressly not preempted. See §§ 395.0191(8), 395.0193(8), and 766.101(5), Fla. Stat. (2008) (providing

Cedars Healthcare Group, Ltd. v. Mehta

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2009-08-05

Citation: 16 So. 3d 914, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 10720, 2009 WL 2382995

Snippet: ground that they are immune from suit under section 395.0193, Florida Statutes (2002). The petition challenges