Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 765.105 (2025)
Review of surrogate or proxy’s decision.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
765.105 Review of surrogate or proxy’s decision.—
(1) The patient’s family, the health care facility, or the primary physician, or any other interested person who may reasonably be expected to be directly affected by the surrogate or proxy’s decision concerning any health care decision may seek expedited judicial intervention pursuant to rule 5.900 of the Florida Probate Rules, if that person believes:
(a) The surrogate or proxy’s decision is not in accord with the patient’s known desires or this chapter;
(b) The advance directive is ambiguous, or the patient has changed his or her mind after execution of the advance directive;
(c) The surrogate or proxy was improperly designated or appointed, or the designation of the surrogate is no longer effective or has been revoked;
(d) The surrogate or proxy has failed to discharge duties, or incapacity or illness renders the surrogate or proxy incapable of discharging duties;
(e) The surrogate or proxy has abused his or her powers; or
(f) The patient has sufficient capacity to make his or her own health care decisions.
(2) This section does not apply to a patient who is not incapacitated and who has designated a surrogate who has immediate authority to make health care decisions or receive health information, or both, on behalf of the patient.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2004–2023 · leading case: Bush v. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2004).
Bush v. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2004). “…in accord with the patient's known desires or the provisions of this chapter." Ch. 92-199, § 2 at 1842, Laws of Fla.; § 765.105, Fla. Stat. (2003).”
Schiavo Ex Rel. Schindler v. Schiavo, 357 F. Supp. 2d 1378 (M.D. Fla. 2005). “§ 765.105 . Applying this statutory scheme, the state court appointed Michael Schiavo, Theresa Schiavo’s husband, as plenary guardian and proxy for Theresa.”
Graham v. Dept. of Child. & Families, 970 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). “Laurence Graham contends next that, in appointing Luke Graham as Betty's temporary plenary guardian, the trial court effectively revoked Betty's valid Directive, and did so without the necessary proof under section 765.105, Florida Statutes (2007), and without notice and a…”
Martinez v. Guardianship of Smith, 159 So. 3d 394 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). “) One of the grounds listed in section 765.105 is: “The surrogate or proxy has abused powers[.”
Diego Sanjuan v. Guardianship of Maria Angelica Mena (Fla. 4th DCA 2022). “We affirm the court’s appointment of the brothers as co-guardians without further discussion. But we reverse the court’s revocation of the ward’s appointment of a health care surrogate for failure to “express[] which grounds supported revocation and absent evidence of any of the…”
In Re: Amendments to Florida Prob. Rules - 2023 Legislation (Fla. 2023). “(1) The court must hold a hearing if: (A) the ward or the ward’s attorney, if any, objects to the petition; (B) the ward’s next of kin or an interested person objects for any reason authorized by section 765.105(1), Florida Statutes; (C) the professional guardian, the ward, or…”
— 765.105(1) — 2 cases
Bush v. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2004). “…in accord with the patient's known desires or the provisions of this chapter." Ch. 92-199, § 2 at 1842, Laws of Fla.; § 765.105, Fla. Stat. (2003).”
In Re: Amendments to Florida Prob. Rules - 2023 Legislation (Fla. 2023). “(1) The court must hold a hearing if: (A) the ward or the ward’s attorney, if any, objects to the petition; (B) the ward’s next of kin or an interested person objects for any reason authorized by section 765.105(1), Florida Statutes; (C) the professional guardian, the ward, or…”
— 765.105(5) — 1 case
Martinez v. Guardianship of Smith, 159 So. 3d 394 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). “) One of the grounds listed in section 765.105 is: “The surrogate or proxy has abused powers[.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.