Orlando Health — Sixth District affirmed the administrative ruling without a written explanation

Case
Orlando Health, Inc. d/b/a Winnie Palmer Hospital for Women & Babies v. Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association, Shivonne Douglas and Dacoup Howell, on Behalf of and as Parents and Natural Guardians of R. H., a Minor
Court
Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal
Judge
TRAVER, C.J. (Ron DeSantis, 2023); STARGEL, J. (Ron DeSantis, 2023); PRATT, J. (Ron DeSantis, 2025)
Date Decided
October 13, 2026
Docket No.
6D2025-0823
Topics
Administrative Appeal; Birth-Related Neurological Injury; Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Orlando Health, Inc., doing business as Winnie Palmer Hospital for Women & Babies, appealed a matter from the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings. The appellees were the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association and Shivonne Douglas and Dacoup Howell, acting on behalf of and as parents and natural guardians of their minor child, R.H.

The Sixth District’s opinion does not describe the underlying injury, the administrative proceedings, the challenged ruling, the parties’ arguments, or the relief sought on appeal. It identifies the lower-tribunal proceeding as No. 25-0411N.

The Court’s Holding

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the Division of Administrative Hearings’ ruling. The decision was issued per curiam, with Chief Judge Traver and Judges Stargel and Pratt concurring.

The court provided no reasoning and announced no express rule of law. Accordingly, the opinion does not reveal which arguments the court accepted or rejected beyond leaving the administrative ruling in place.

Key Takeaways

  • The Sixth District affirmed the administrative ruling.
  • The court issued a per curiam affirmance without a written explanation.
  • The opinion supplies no substantive facts, legal analysis, or express precedent concerning Florida’s birth-related neurological injury compensation framework.

Why It Matters

The result preserves the ruling entered in the administrative proceeding as between these parties. Because the court did not explain its reasoning, the opinion offers practitioners no substantive appellate guidance on the underlying dispute or the governing legal standards.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top