TORRES, ET AL. V. VARIETY CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed October 31, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D18-1355 Lower Tribunal No. 17-14294 ________________ Linezka Torres and Jorge Navarro, as Parents and Legal Guardians of Lucas Navarro, their minor son, Petitioners, vs. Variety Children's Hospital, a Florida Not for Profit Corporation, d/b/a Nicklaus Children's Hospital, Respondent. A Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Dennis J. Murphy, Judge. Goldberg & Rosen, P.A., and Judd G. Rosen and Mustafa H. Dandashly; Eaton & Wolk, P.L., and Douglas F. Eaton, for petitioners. Falk, Waas, Hernandez, Cortina, Solomon & Bonner, P.A., and Norman M. Waas, Scott E. Solomon and Richard Warren, for respondent Variety Children’s Hospital d/b/a Nicklaus Children’s Hospital; Radey Law Firm, and Thomas A. Crabb and Lauren K. Thompson (Tallahassee), for Intervention Project for Nurses, Inc.; Wicker Smith O’Hara McCoy & Ford, P.A., and Alyssa M. Reiter and Lindsey A. Hicks, for Thomas James Sprufera, III. Before ROTHENBERG, C.J., and SALTER and LINDSEY, JJ. PER CURIAM. Linezka Torres and Jorge Navarro, as parents and legal guardians of Lucas Navarro, their minor son (collectively, “the plaintiffs”), seek certiorari review of the order denying their request for an in camera inspection of a portion of Thomas Sprufera’s patient file held by Intervention Project for Nurses, Inc. (“IPN”). We grant the petition, quash the trial court’s order denying the plaintiffs’ request for an in camera inspection, and direct the trial court to reconsider the plaintiffs’ motion seeking an order from the trial court authorizing the release of these records following its in camera inspection.1 Certiorari granted; order quashed with directions. This Court takes no position on the merits of the plaintiffs’ motion seeking an order from the trial court authorizing IPN to release these documents. 1 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
