Miami Private InvestigationsIn Florida, a medical malpractice claimant cannot simply file suit. Before serving a notice of intent to initiate litigation, the claimant must investigate and establish reasonable grounds to believe that each named defendant was negligent and that the negligence caused injury, and that conclusion must be corroborated by a verified written medical expert opinion (s. 766.203(2), F.S.). A licensed investigator does not supply the medical opinion. What an investigator supplies is the factual foundation around it: every provider and entity correctly identified, the records chain checked for gaps, the witnesses found, and the defendants’ histories researched — so the expert reviews a complete file and the notice reaches the right people.
This article covers the medical-negligence version of the process. For the broader picture across case types, see our guide to pre-suit investigation in Florida.
What does Florida law require before the notice of intent?
Three provisions set the frame. Section 766.203 requires the claimant’s presuit investigation and the corroborating expert opinion, and it applies to all medical negligence claims, including those against the state or its agencies under s. 768.28 (s. 766.203(1)). Section 766.104(1) requires the attorney who files to certify that a reasonable investigation gave rise to a good-faith belief that grounds exist against each named defendant. And because that work takes time, s. 766.104(2) allows an automatic 90-day extension of the limitations period, on petition to the clerk of the court where suit will be filed, to allow the investigation; no court order is needed.
The limitations period itself is short. An action for medical malpractice must be commenced within two years from the incident, or from when it was or should have been discovered, and in no event more than four years from the incident, subject to exceptions for minors and for fraud or concealment (s. 95.11(5)(c), F.S.). The notice of intent must be served within those limits (s. 766.106(4), F.S.). An investigation that starts late compresses everything after it.
Who are all the providers and entities involved?
A notice goes to each prospective defendant (s. 766.106(2)(a)), and the attorney’s certificate covers each named defendant. Identifying them is rarely as simple as reading the physician’s name off a discharge summary. A single admission can involve an attending physician, a hospitalist group, a contracted emergency or anesthesia group, a radiology reading service, nurses employed by a staffing agency, and the facility itself, each potentially a separate legal entity. An investigator works through:
- Who actually provided care, from signatures, initials and user IDs in the chart, matched to people.
- Who employed or contracted them, using Division of Corporations records, fictitious-name filings and the professional association behind the practice name on the letterhead.
- Licensing, through the Department of Health’s public licence records, including the address of record.
That last point matters for service. Proof that the notice was delivered to an address on file with the Department of Health, the Secretary of State or the Agency for Health Care Administration creates a rebuttable presumption that the prospective defendant received it (s. 766.106(2)(b)1.). Confirming those addresses before the notice goes out is basic, and easy to skip. Where a provider has moved, our skip trace services apply the same locate methods we use for service of process.
Where are the gaps in the records chain?
The notice itself must include, if available, a list of all known providers who saw the claimant for the injuries after the alleged negligence, all known providers who treated or evaluated the claimant in the two years before it, copies of the records the expert relied on, and the executed authorization form in s. 766.1065 (s. 766.106(2)(c)). The authorization is not a formality: a notice without it is void, and revoking it voids the notice retroactively (s. 766.1065(1)-(2), F.S.).
Building that provider list is investigative work. The client usually remembers the specialist; they rarely remember the urgent-care visit eighteen months earlier, the pharmacy that filled the prescription, or the ambulance service that transported them. An investigator reconstructs the timeline from the client’s own documents — insurance explanations of benefits, pharmacy histories, appointment reminders, receipts — and compares it against the records received. Typical gaps include missing nursing notes for a shift, imaging reports without the images, transfer paperwork that names a facility nobody requested records from, and billing entries for services that do not appear in the chart. Each gap is either a records request still to make or a question for the expert.
Records requests in this context have a statutory clock: copies of medical records relevant to a medical negligence claim must be provided within 10 business days of a request (20 days for certain hospital districts), and failure to provide them counts as evidence of failure to comply with good-faith discovery requirements (s. 766.204, F.S.).
Which witnesses should be found before the notice goes out?
Family members who were at the bedside, a roommate, a nurse or technician who has since left the facility, the transport crew. Staff turnover means the people who remember the shift can be hard to reach within months. Locating and neutrally interviewing them early, for the attorney, gives the expert facts the chart may not show — who was in the room, how long a call light was on, what was said at discharge. See our civil plaintiff investigations page for how that work is documented.
What prior-claims and background checks are worth running?
Public court records can show prior negligence suits against the same provider or entity, and the Department of Health’s public licence records can show disciplinary history. Neither proves anything about this case, but both inform the attorney’s evaluation and the questions the expert is asked. The same research identifies corporate relationships and any change of ownership since the incident. Our background investigations use the same lawful public-record methods.
What happens during the 90-day period?
Once notice is delivered, suit may not be filed for 90 days, and the limitations period is tolled during that time (s. 766.106(3)(a), (4)). The prospective defendant and its insurer must investigate in good faith, and by the end of the 90 days must reject the claim, make a settlement offer, or offer to arbitrate with liability admitted; silence counts as a final rejection (s. 766.106(3)(b)-(c)). Both sides use informal discovery: unsworn statements, document requests answered within 20 days, and up to 30 written questions (s. 766.106(6)(b)).
For the claimant’s side, those 90 days are not a waiting room. It is the time to finish locating witnesses, run down late-arriving records, and prepare for unsworn statements. Two protections apply to work done in the process: work product generated solely by the presuit investigation process is not discoverable or admissible by the opposing party, and participants, expressly including investigators, are immune from civil liability arising from participation (s. 766.205(4), F.S.). How that applies to a given piece of work is a judgment for counsel, which is one reason the investigator should be retained by and report to the attorney.
When should an investigator be brought in?
At intake, before records are ordered, so the request list is built from a reconstructed timeline rather than the client’s memory. Our page on investigating a claim before filing suit explains how we scope this work with law firms, and our services for attorneys page lists the related support we provide.
Miami Private Investigations is licensed in Florida under agency licence A1800135. Attorneys can call (305) 686-7826 or contact us for a confidential consultation about a pending claim.