When medical care goes wrong in Florida, injured patients face strict deadlines for taking legal action. Understanding the statute of limitations for medical malpractice in Florida is essential because missing these deadlines can permanently eliminate your right to seek compensation—regardless of how strong your case might be.
Florida law establishes specific time limits that govern when medical malpractice lawsuits must be filed. These rules balance the need to give injured patients reasonable time to discover and pursue claims against the interest in resolving disputes while evidence remains fresh. The deadlines can be surprisingly short, and determining exactly when the clock starts running requires careful legal analysis.
What Is the Statute of Limitations for Medical Malpractice in Florida?
Florida imposes two distinct but interconnected deadlines that govern medical malpractice claims. Both derive from Fla. Stat. § 95.11(4)(b), and understanding how they interact is crucial for anyone considering a claim.
The Two-Year Filing Deadline
The standard statute of limitations for medical malpractice in Florida is two years. This means a lawsuit must generally be commenced within two years from the time the incident giving rise to the claim occurred, or within two years from the time the incident is discovered or should have been discovered with the exercise of due diligence.
The two-year period reflects a legislative judgment about how long patients should reasonably have to investigate potential malpractice and prepare their claims. However, the starting point for this two-year window is not always obvious, particularly when injuries take time to manifest or when patients do not immediately realize that negligent care caused their harm.
The Four-Year Statute of Repose
Separate from the two-year limitations period, Florida imposes a four-year statute of repose. Under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(4)(b), no medical malpractice action may be commenced more than four years from the date of the incident, regardless of when the patient discovered or could have discovered the injury.
The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of this four-year repose period in Kush v. Lloyd, 616 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 1992). The court recognized that the repose period begins from the date of the negligent act itself, not from when any later-manifesting injury becomes apparent. This creates an absolute outer boundary that can bar claims even when patients had no realistic opportunity to discover the malpractice within four years.
How These Deadlines Work Together
These two deadlines operate simultaneously, and the claim must satisfy both requirements. The following principles govern Florida medical malpractice filing deadlines:
- The two-year statute of limitations runs from discovery of the injury and its potential connection to malpractice.
- The four-year statute of repose runs from the date of the negligent act, regardless of discovery.
- Whichever deadline expires first will control when the claim becomes time-barred.
- Certain exceptions can extend these deadlines under specific circumstances.
- Pre-suit investigation requirements can toll (pause) the limitations period but must be initiated before deadlines expire.
A patient who discovers an injury three years after negligent treatment would be within the four-year repose period but would need to act quickly to meet the two-year discovery-based deadline. Conversely, a patient who could not reasonably discover an injury until five years after treatment would be barred by the four-year repose even though the two-year discovery period had not yet run.
When Does the Statute of Limitations Clock Start Running?
Call us today at (305) 694-2676 or
contact us online for a free case evaluation.
Hablamos español.
Determining exactly when the statute of limitations begins is often the most complex and contested issue in medical malpractice timing disputes. Florida courts have developed specific rules for identifying the accrual date.
The Discovery Rule Under Florida Law
Florida follows a discovery rule for medical malpractice claims, meaning the two-year limitations period does not necessarily begin on the date of the negligent treatment. Instead, the clock starts when the patient discovers, or through reasonable diligence should have discovered, both the injury and its potential connection to medical negligence.
The Florida Supreme Court first articulated this approach in Nardone v. Reynolds, 333 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 1976), holding that the statute of limitations commences when the plaintiff has notice of either the negligent act giving rise to the cause of action or the physical injury caused by that act. This rule recognizes that patients often cannot immediately identify when substandard care has harmed them.
The Tanner Test for Determining Accrual
The Florida Supreme Court refined the discovery rule in Tanner v. Hartog, 618 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 1993), establishing what is now known as the Tanner test. Under this standard, the statute of limitations begins to run when the patient knows, or through due diligence should know, both that an injury has occurred and that there is a reasonable possibility that the injury was caused by medical malpractice.
This dual-knowledge requirement is significant. A patient who knows they suffered a complication but reasonably believes it resulted from an unavoidable risk rather than negligence may not trigger the limitations period until they have reason to suspect malpractice. The Tanner test requires knowledge of injury plus knowledge of the reasonable possibility of medical negligence as the cause.
Constructive Discovery and Due Diligence
Florida law does not permit patients to avoid the statute of limitations by simply ignoring warning signs. The limitations period begins not only when the patient actually discovers the injury and potential malpractice but also when the patient should have discovered these facts through the exercise of due diligence.
Courts evaluate what a reasonable person in the patient’s circumstances would have investigated and when. Symptoms that a reasonable patient would recognize as potentially linked to medical error can trigger the limitations period even if the patient chose not to pursue further inquiry. This constructive discovery principle prevents plaintiffs from benefiting from their own failure to investigate obvious problems.
What Exceptions Can Extend the Filing Deadline?
Florida law recognizes several circumstances that can modify the standard limitations and repose periods. These exceptions address situations where strict application of the deadlines would produce particularly unjust results.
Extended Deadlines for Minor Children
Children injured by medical malpractice receive special protection under Florida law. The four-year statute of repose does not bar an action brought on behalf of a minor if the lawsuit is filed on or before the child’s eighth birthday. This exception recognizes that very young children cannot advocate for themselves and that their parents may face delays in identifying developmental injuries caused by negligent care.
For birth injuries and early childhood medical malpractice, this provision can substantially extend the filing window. However, claims must still be filed before the child turns eight, and the standard two-year discovery-based limitations period applies once the injury and potential malpractice are discovered or should have been discovered.
Fraud, Concealment, and Intentional Misrepresentation
When a healthcare provider engages in fraud, concealment, or intentional misrepresentation that prevents the patient from discovering the malpractice, Florida extends the filing deadline. Under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(4)(b), the limitations period extends to two years from the date the patient discovers or should have discovered the fraud, concealment, or misrepresentation.
However, even in fraud cases, an outer limit applies. No action based on fraud, concealment, or misrepresentation may be commenced more than seven years from the date of the incident—unless the claim involves a minor, in which case the seven-year cap does not apply if the action is filed before the child’s eighth birthday.
The following circumstances may qualify for extended deadlines under Florida law:
- Fraud, concealment, or intentional misrepresentation by the healthcare provider that prevented discovery
- Claims involving minor children filed before the child’s eighth birthday
- Certain cases involving legal incapacity under Fla. Stat. § 95.051
- Periods during which the defendant is absent from Florida under circumstances preventing service of process
- Active military service in certain circumstances
- The 90-day pre-suit investigation period, which tolls the limitations period
Incapacity Tolling for Adults
Under Fla. Stat. § 95.051, the statute of limitations may be tolled for adults who are legally incapacitated and unable to manage their own affairs. However, this tolling has limits in the medical malpractice context. No malpractice claim may be brought more than seven years from the date of the incident regardless of incapacity, unless the claim involves fraud, concealment, or misrepresentation.
This seven-year absolute limit means that even patients rendered permanently incapacitated by medical negligence face an ultimate deadline for bringing claims. Families and guardians of incapacitated patients should be aware of this constraint when evaluating potential claims.
How Do Pre-Suit Requirements Affect the Timeline?
Florida imposes mandatory pre-suit investigation requirements on medical malpractice claimants. These requirements create both obligations and opportunities that directly affect limitations period calculations.
The Mandatory 90-Day Investigation Period
Before filing a medical malpractice lawsuit in Florida, the claimant must complete a pre-suit investigation and serve a Notice of Intent on each prospective defendant. Under Fla. Stat. § 766.106, this notice must be served by certified mail at least 90 days before filing suit.
The notice initiates a mandatory 90-day screening period during which the parties investigate the claim. During this period, the defendant must respond with a rejection of the claim, a settlement offer, or an offer to arbitrate. No lawsuit may be filed until this 90-day period expires.
How Pre-Suit Notice Tolls the Limitations Period
Critically, mailing the Notice of Intent tolls (pauses) the statute of limitations. The Florida Supreme Court confirmed in Musculoskeletal Institute Chartered v. Parham, 745 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 1999), that filing the notice of intent tolls both the statute of limitations and the statute of repose. In Boyd v. Becker, 627 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1993), the court clarified that the 90-day tolling period is measured from when prospective defendants receive the notice, not when it is mailed.
The Notice of Intent must include specific elements required by Fla. Stat. § 766.106(2):
- A list of all known healthcare providers who treated the patient for the injuries subsequent to the alleged negligence
- All known providers who treated the patient during the two years before the alleged act
- Copies of all medical records the expert relied upon in signing the corroborating affidavit
- An executed HIPAA authorization form per Fla. Stat. § 766.1065
- The verified written expert opinion corroborating reasonable grounds to support the claim
- Identification of the defendant providers and the basis for the claim against each
After the 90-day pre-suit period ends, the claimant has 60 days or the remainder of the original limitations period—whichever is greater—to file suit if the defendant rejected the claim or failed to respond.
Purchasing Additional Time with a 90-Day Extension
Florida law provides another timing mechanism for claimants who need additional time to complete their investigation. Under Fla. Stat. § 766.104(2), a claimant may petition the clerk of court for an automatic 90-day extension of the limitations period. This petition must be filed within the original limitations period and requires payment of a filing fee.
The Florida Supreme Court addressed the interaction between this purchased extension and the pre-suit tolling period in Hillsborough County Hospital Authority v. Coffaro, 829 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 2002), confirming that the 90-day purchased extension may be added to the time remaining after the pre-suit period ends. This provides claimants with a mechanism to gain additional investigation time when needed.
Are There Different Deadlines for Wrongful Death Claims?
Get started with your complimentary case evaluation today;
call us at (305) 694-2676 or reach us online using our
secure contact form.
When medical malpractice results in a patient’s death, different timing rules apply to wrongful death claims. These claims are governed by Florida’s Wrongful Death Act rather than the standard medical malpractice limitations statute.
The Two-Year Deadline from Date of Death
Under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(4)(d), wrongful death actions must be commenced within two years from the date of death. This deadline runs from when the death occurred, not from when the negligent medical treatment was provided. For patients who survive for an extended period after negligent care before ultimately dying from related complications, this can provide additional time compared to personal injury claims.
The wrongful death statute of limitations is simpler than the medical malpractice discovery rule because the triggering event—death—is unambiguous. There is no need to analyze when the patient discovered or should have discovered the injury, since the death itself is the harm giving rise to the wrongful death claim.
How Wrongful Death Differs from Personal Injury Claims
Wrongful death medical malpractice claims involve several procedural distinctions beyond the different limitations period. Only the personal representative of the decedent’s estate may bring the action, and it must be brought for the benefit of designated survivors. The damages recoverable depend on the relationship of each survivor to the decedent.
What Happens If You Miss the Filing Deadline?
The consequences of missing the statute of limitations in Florida medical malpractice cases are severe and generally irreversible. Understanding these consequences underscores the importance of timely action.
The Consequences of a Time-Barred Claim
When the statute of limitations or statute of repose expires, the claim becomes time-barred. A defendant can raise the expired deadline as an affirmative defense, and courts will dismiss the case regardless of the underlying merits. Even the clearest evidence of negligence causing catastrophic harm cannot overcome an expired limitations period.
The Florida Supreme Court has consistently upheld these time bars as constitutional, recognizing in cases like Kush v. Lloyd that limitations periods serve important purposes including providing repose for defendants and encouraging timely prosecution of claims while evidence remains available.
Why Early Consultation Matters
Given the mandatory pre-suit investigation requirements and the potential complexity of determining when the limitations period began to run, patients who suspect medical malpractice should consult with an attorney as early as possible. Florida’s pre-suit requirements mean that substantial work must be completed before a lawsuit can even be filed, including obtaining qualified expert opinions and serving proper notice on all defendants.
Early consultation also allows time to gather and preserve evidence. Medical records must be obtained, witnesses identified, and expert witnesses retained. When claims are pursued close to the deadline, these necessary steps become rushed and may compromise the strength of the case.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the statute of limitations apply differently if a foreign object was left inside me during surgery?
The same two-year and four-year deadlines apply to retained foreign object cases. However, these cases often involve delayed discovery because patients may not realize a sponge, instrument, or other object remains inside them until symptoms develop or imaging reveals the problem. The discovery rule means the two-year period would typically begin when the retained object is discovered or should have been discovered, though the four-year repose period still runs from the date of the surgery.
Can I still file a claim if I discovered the malpractice more than two years ago but less than four years from the incident?
Generally no. Under the Tanner test, the two-year limitations period begins when you discover both the injury and the reasonable possibility that it resulted from malpractice. If you had this knowledge more than two years ago, your claim is likely time-barred even though the four-year repose period has not yet expired. The two-year discovery-based deadline and four-year repose period operate independently, and whichever expires first controls.
What if my doctor assured me that complications were normal and not due to any error?
If a healthcare provider made false statements that prevented you from discovering malpractice, Florida’s fraud and concealment exception may apply. This could extend your deadline to two years from when you discovered or should have discovered the misrepresentation, with a seven-year outer limit from the incident. However, this exception requires actual fraud, concealment, or intentional misrepresentation—mere reassurance or optimistic statements may not qualify. Courts evaluate these claims carefully.
Does the statute of limitations pause if I am negotiating a settlement with the healthcare provider?
No. Settlement negotiations do not automatically toll the statute of limitations in Florida. The only tolling mechanisms recognized by statute are the pre-suit investigation period under Fla. Stat. § 766.106 and certain limited circumstances like defendant absence from the state. Patients should not assume that ongoing discussions with healthcare providers or their insurers protect their right to file suit. The formal Notice of Intent process is what triggers tolling.
How does the statute of limitations work if I was injured at a government hospital in Florida?
Claims against government hospitals and healthcare providers are subject to sovereign immunity provisions under Fla. Stat. § 768.28, which impose additional requirements. Written notice must be received by the government agency and the Department of Financial Services within three years of accrual. After providing notice, the claimant must wait for the government’s investigation period to expire before filing suit. These requirements exist alongside—not instead of—the medical malpractice statute of limitations, creating multiple deadlines that must all be satisfied.
Protecting Your Right to Seek Compensation
Florida’s statute of limitations for medical malpractice creates firm deadlines that courts enforce strictly. The two-year discovery-based limitations period, four-year statute of repose, and mandatory pre-suit requirements all demand that injured patients act with reasonable promptness to preserve their legal rights.
The complexity of determining when the limitations period begins—particularly under the Tanner test requiring knowledge of both injury and reasonable possibility of malpractice—makes early legal evaluation important. Patients who wait until close to potential deadlines may find their claims already barred or may face rushed investigations that compromise their cases.
If you have questions about whether you still have time to pursue a medical malpractice claim in Florida, contact Prosper Injury Attorneys to discuss your situation.
