HomeMy WebLinkAbout1585i
I
1. SS 768.16-.27, Fla. Stet. (1976 Supp.).
2. U.S. Coast., amend. XIV, S 1.
3. Art. I, S 21, Fla. Coast. (1976)
`. $ 768.« , Fla. Stet. (1976 Supp.).
5. S 95.11(~)(b), Fla. Stet. (1976 Supp.).
6. S 95.11(4)(d), Fla. Stet. (1976 Supp.).
7. Our jurisdiction was invoked under Art. v, S 3(b)(3), Fla.
Coast. (1972).
8. Stern v. !tiller, 3~8 So.2d 303. 304-05 (1977).
9. Rule 20.190(b), Fla. R. Med. P. (1978). But see Greece v. Brorard
Gen. tsedical Center, 356 So.2d 877 (Fla. i~Ti-DG[
1978)(claioant entitled to pursue cause of action in circuit
court for medical malpractice although jurisdictioa of
mediation panel terminated).
10. See Nolen v. Sarasohn, 379 So.2d 161 (Fla. 3d DG 1980);
Tend v. Aylward, 373 So.2d 92 (Fla. 2d DG- 1979).
11.
The judge, even when he is free, is still
not wholly free. He is not to innovate at
pleasure. Ha is not a knight-arrant,
roastiaq at rill fa pursuit of his owns ideal
of beauty or of goodness. He is to drar
his inspiration frc~ consecrated
principles. He fs not to yield to
spasmodic sentiment, to vague and
unregulated benevolence.
B.H. Cardozo, The Nature of the Judicial Process I41 (1921).
-5-
a~3~4 P,~~1~35
z __ Y~.: