Florida medical malpractice claims are governed by a statutory framework that combines a discovery-based statute of limitations with an absolute statute of repose. These deadlines are set forth primarily in Florida Statutes § 95.11(4)(b) and operate independently of general negligence filing rules.
Under this framework, actions must be filed within two years of discovery but no later than four years from the alleged negligent act, subject to limited statutory extensions. Florida’s approach represents one variation within broader medical malpractice statutes of limitations by state.
This article explains Florida’s core filing deadlines, discovery rule application, tolling exceptions, presuit notice effects, and recent statutory updates affecting malpractice claims.
Core Rules for the Medical Malpractice Statute of Limitations in Florida
Fla. Stat. § 95.11(4)(b) establishes a dual-deadline framework governing medical malpractice actions. Claims must be filed within a discovery-based statute of limitations and are subject to an absolute statute of repose, with the earlier deadline controlling.
Two-Year Statute of Limitations
An action must be commenced within two years from the date the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known, through due diligence, that an injury occurred and that there was a reasonable possibility the injury was caused by medical negligence. Florida courts require awareness of both injury and causation to trigger the limitations period, as articulated in Tanner v. Hartog, 618 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 1993).
Four-Year Statute of Repose
Regardless of discovery, no medical malpractice action may be filed more than four years after the date of the alleged negligent act. The repose period runs from the incident itself and operates independently of the discovery rule, per University of Miami v. Bogorff, 583 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 1991).
Applicability of the Framework
The two-year and four-year deadlines apply only to claims arising from the provision of medical care or services. Ordinary negligence claims against healthcare providers—such as premises liability or slip-and-fall incidents—are governed by the general four-year negligence statute under § 95.11(3)(a) and are not subject to medical malpractice presuit requirements.
Tolling Exceptions in Medical Malpractice Cases
Florida recognizes only limited tolling exceptions in medical malpractice actions. Courts construe these exceptions narrowly, and tolling applies only where expressly authorized by statute or supported by affirmative misconduct.
1. Minors Under Age Eight
Fla. Stat. § 95.051(1)(i) excludes medical malpractice claims from general incapacity tolling. However, when the injured patient is eight years old or younger at the time of the alleged malpractice, the filing deadline is extended until the child’s eighth birthday.
2. Fraudulent Concealment or Intentional Misrepresentation
The four-year statute of repose may be extended to a maximum of seven years when fraud, concealment, or intentional misrepresentation prevents discovery of the injury. Tolling requires affirmative acts designed to prevent discovery; mere silence or nondisclosure is insufficient, as explained in Nardone v. Reynolds, 333 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 1976), and Barron v. Shapiro, 565 So. 2d 1319 (Fla. 1990).
3. Foreign Objects Exception
Fla. Stat. § 766.102(3)(b) creates a statutory exception for foreign objects unintentionally left inside a patient’s body during a medical procedure. In such cases, the limitations period begins upon discovery or when the object reasonably should have been discovered, per Silvestrone v. Edell, 721 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1998). This exception does not apply to medical devices or implants intentionally placed.
4. Continuous Treatment Doctrine Not Recognized
Florida does not recognize the continuous treatment doctrine as a basis for tolling. Ongoing treatment by the same provider does not delay accrual of the statute of limitations or statute of repose, as confirmed in Truslow v. Spooner Physical Therapy Services, 736 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
Key Florida Decisions Interpreting Medical Malpractice Filing Deadlines
Florida courts have issued several decisions clarifying how the medical malpractice statute of limitations and statute of repose operate in practice. The following cases establish the core interpretive rules governing discovery, repose, and tolling, and are routinely cited in limitations disputes.
Tanner v. Hartog — Discovery Rule and Dual Awareness Requirement
In Tanner v. Hartog, 618 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 1993), the Florida Supreme Court held that the two-year statute of limitations does not begin until the plaintiff knows, or through reasonable diligence should know, both that an injury has occurred and that there is a reasonable possibility the injury was caused by medical negligence. Awareness of an adverse medical outcome alone is insufficient to trigger accrual, absent reason to suspect negligence.
University of Miami v. Bogorff — Statute of Repose As An Absolute Bar
In University of Miami v. Bogorff, 583 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 1991), the Court reaffirmed that the four-year statute of repose operates independently of the discovery rule and serves as an absolute deadline. The repose period runs from the date of the alleged negligent act, regardless of later discovery or continued treatment.
Nardone v. Reynolds — Fraudulent Concealment and Tolling Standards
In Nardone v. Reynolds, 333 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 1976), the Florida Supreme Court held that tolling based on fraudulent concealment requires affirmative acts designed to prevent discovery of the negligence. Mere silence, nondisclosure, or general reassurances do not suspend the running of the statute of limitations or extend the statute of repose.
Presuit Notice Requirements and Statute of Limitations Tolling
Florida law requires pre-suit investigation procedures before a medical malpractice action may be filed. These requirements operate as a procedural overlay that can temporarily toll the statute of limitations when strictly complied with.
Under Fla. Stat. § 766.106, a claimant must serve a written notice of intent to initiate litigation at least 90 days before filing suit. The notice must be supported by a verified written medical opinion corroborating reasonable grounds to believe that medical negligence occurred.
When a presuit notice is properly served, Fla. Stat. § 766.104 tolls the statute of limitations during the presuit investigation period. Key features of this tolling mechanism include:
- Tolling is triggered by mailing, not receipt, of presuit notice, as clarified in Boyle v. Samotin, 322 So. 3d 399 (Fla. 2022).
- Tolling applies only if notice is served before the applicable deadline; mailing after expiration of the two-year or four-year period does not revive a time-barred claim.
- The tolling period generally lasts 90 days, corresponding to the defendant’s presuit investigation window under § 766.106(4).
- Tolling applies only to defendants appropriately named and noticed; failure to comply with statutory notice requirements as to a specific provider prevents tolling for that party.
Defendants are entitled to conduct a pre-suit investigation during the tolling period and must respond within the statutory timeframe by admitting liability, denying the claim, or offering arbitration.
Recent Updates to Medical Malpractice Statute of Limitations Laws in Florida
Florida’s core medical malpractice statute of limitations under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(4)(b) remained unchanged between 2020 and 2025 for claims against private healthcare providers.
In Boyle v. Samotin, the Florida Supreme Court clarified that tolling under Fla. Stat. § 766.104 is triggered by mailing—rather than receipt—of presuit notice, resolving prior appellate conflicts.
Legislation effective October 1, 2026, creates a separate limitations framework for claims against government healthcare providers. Under HB 145, negligence claims against government entities as defined in Fla. Stat. § 768.28 are subject to a uniform two-year filing deadline, without a separate four-year statute of repose. Private healthcare providers remain governed by the existing two-year/four-year structure.
Common Statutory Applications
In practice, Florida courts apply the medical malpractice statute of limitations as follows:
- Standard filing deadline: Claims must be filed within two years of discovery, but no later than four years from the date of the alleged negligent act, unless a statutory extension applies.
- Continuous treatment: Ongoing treatment by the same healthcare provider does not delay accrual or toll the statute of limitations.
- Extensions of the repose period: The four-year statute of repose may be extended to a maximum of seven years in cases involving fraud, concealment, or intentional misrepresentation, and for certain claims involving minors under age eight.
- Presuit notice tolling: Mailing a compliant presuit notice before the applicable deadline tolls the statute of limitations during the presuit investigation period, typically 90 days, subject to statutory conditions.
Meeting Medical Malpractice Filing Deadlines in Florida
Florida’s medical malpractice statute of limitations imposes a strict two-year discovery-based filing period alongside a four-year statute of repose, with only narrow statutory extensions. Courts apply these deadlines rigidly, and failure to satisfy tolling or presuit notice requirements can permanently bar claims regardless of their merits.
Because these deadlines are triggered by discovery and procedural compliance, accurate timeline development often depends on timely medical records retrieval and documentation review. Comprehensive medical records are central to determining accrual, tolling applicability, and presuit notice timing.
Explore Tavrn’s legal technology solutions.
.webp)
.webp)
