Montejo v. Martin Memorial Medical Center

935 So. 2d 1266 (2006)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Montejo v. Martin Memorial Medical Center

Florida District Court of Appeal
935 So. 2d 1266 (2006)

Facts

Montejo Gaspar Montejo (plaintiff) was appointed the guardian of Luis Alberto Jimenez after Jimenez was in a car crash that left him with brain damage and significant physical injuries. Although Jimenez lived and worked in Florida, he was an undocumented Guatemalan national. Jimenez was initially hospitalized in February 2000 at Martin Memorial Medical Center (the hospital) (defendant). After around 20 months of care at the hospital and a skilled nursing facility, Montejo submitted a guardianship plan stating that 24-hour care would be required for Jimenez for the next year. Because Jimenez was poor, his medical expenses were increasing, and Medicare would not pay for his care, the hospital intervened in the guardianship proceedings, seeking authorization to discharge Jimenez and send him back to Guatemala for continuing care. Federal law required a demonstration that appropriate care could be received in Guatemala. At a hearing in June 2023, a circuit court granted the hospital permission to send Jimenez to Guatemala. Montejo moved for rehearing, which was denied on July 9. On that same day, Montejo filed an appeal and moved to stay the court’s order allowing Jimenez’s discharge until the appeal was heard. The circuit court instructed the hospital to respond to Montejo’s motion to stay by 10:00 a.m. on July 10. Instead, the hospital discharged Jimenez, carried him to an airport in an ambulance, and flew him to Guatemala on a private plane. In May 2004, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the circuit court’s order that had authorized Jimenez’s return to Guatemala because there was not enough evidence that the medical care Jimenez needed was available in Guatemala and because the circuit court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction to have permitted Jimenez’s deportation. Thus, in September 2004, Montejo sued the hospital for false imprisonment because of Jimenez’s confinement in the ambulance and the airplane. The hospital moved for dismissal or judgment on the pleadings, arguing in part that Montejo could not show the fourth element of a false-imprisonment claim relating to the unreasonableness of detention because the hospital was acting pursuant to a court order that was valid at the time. The circuit court dismissed Montejo’s claim with prejudice. Montejo appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Stevenson, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership