Settlement propsal for single hospital by two defendants that own, control, maintained single entity enforceable where hospital is only entity allegedly responsible for negligence and defendants were treated as single entities during litigation.

The plaintiff appealed the enforcement of a proposal for settlement on the basis that it failed to apportion the offer between two separately named defendants. The Florida Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a joint proposal for settlement shall state the amount and terms attributable to each party. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442(c)(3). The defendants argued that the proposal did not have to apportion the offer because the hospital was the single entity alleged to be responsible for the claims asserted. The court ruled in favor of the defendants, determining that the proposal complied with the requirements of section 768.79, Fla. Stat. and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442 because, although the complaint named two companies as defendants that owned, controlled or maintained the hospital, each company was alleged to be responsible for the negligence of a single hospital entity and the defendants were treated as a single entity during the litigation. This case emphasizes the importance of determining whether apportionment is necessary prior to serving a proposal for settlement in cases where a hospital entity is owned, controlled or maintained by separate corporate entities and reminds us that when distinct claims or allegations are made against the various entities, apportionment is necessary to render the proposal valid and enforceable.

Case Law Alert - 3rd Qtr 2012