## Facts

- A wrongful-death medical malpractice action alleged the decedent died from complications during induction of anesthesia before surgery.
- The pre-suit notice of intent and the subsequent complaint were prepared and signed by a Michigan attorney who was not licensed in Florida and had not been admitted pro hac vice when the documents were filed.
- A defendant physician moved to disqualify the Michigan attorney under the rule governing appearances by out-of-state attorneys.
- The Michigan attorney acknowledged he was unlicensed in Florida and sought permission to appear with Florida co-counsel; the trial court granted permission.
- Defendants then moved to dismiss, arguing the complaint was a legal nullity because it was signed by an unlicensed attorney and could not be cured.
- The trial court treated the filing defect as requiring “excusable neglect,” dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to show excusable neglect, and the expired statute of limitations prevented refiling.
- The district court of appeal affirmed on the ground the complaint was a nullity and not subject to amendment.

## Issues

1. Whether a civil complaint filed and signed by an attorney not licensed in Florida and not yet admitted pro hac vice is a “nullity” requiring dismissal.
2. Whether the defect is amendable, permitting the plaintiff to cure the signature/authorization problem and proceed on a timely filed complaint.

## Decision

- The Florida Supreme Court quashed the district court’s decision and remanded.
- The Court held a complaint signed and filed by an attorney not licensed in Florida is not a nullity; it is an amendable defect.
- The plaintiff must be given a reasonable opportunity to correct the deficiency (e.g., substitution of Florida counsel or proper pro hac vice admission and adoption of the pleading).
- Dismissal that effectively time-bars the claim based solely on the initial unauthorized signature was improper absent a showing warranting that drastic remedy.

## Legal Principles

- Florida procedural policy favors allowing amendments so cases are decided on the merits; technical signature or capacity defects are generally curable.
- No rule automatically renders pleadings void solely because a non-Florida attorney signed them before pro hac vice authorization.
- Trial courts may address unauthorized practice concerns through disqualification, compliance orders, or sanctions, rather than extinguishing otherwise timely claims.
- Statutes of limitations are aimed at preventing stale claims; where defendants received timely notice and show no prejudice from the defect, the “nullity” approach is disfavored.

## Conclusion

A timely complaint signed by an out-of-state lawyer who lacked Florida authorization at filing is not void; it is subject to cure by amendment or substitution of proper counsel, and courts should not use the signature defect to terminate the action on limitations grounds.


Torrey v. Leesburg Reg'l Med. Ctr., 769 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 2000)