WILLIAM PATRICK RECKNER, PETITIONER,
v.
FOREMOST INSURANCE COMPANY, CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, APPALACHIAN INSURANCE COMPANY, STANLEY CALE, GEORGE MEYERS, JAMES RHODEN, AND GENE EIGHT, RESPONDENTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court granted certiorari to review a Fourth District Court of Appeal decision and quashed it due to a conflict with the Supreme Court's decision in District School Board v. Talmadge and the application of a newly amended statute governing governmental tort liability. The Court remanded for reconsideration in light of these controlling authorities.
The Court held that the Fourth District Court's decision conflicted with Talmadge and that the amended statutory provisions governing governmental tort liability applied to the case. The Court quashed the lower court's decision and remanded for reconsideration under the correct legal framework.
[1] A state or its subdivision is not liable in tort for the acts or omissions of an officer, employee, or agent committed while acting outside the course and scope of employ…
[2] Conduct is within the scope of employment only if it is the type of conduct the employee is hired to perform, occurs substantially within authorized time and space limits…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“This is a petition for certiorari to review a decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, reported at 376 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). We find conflict with our recent decision in District School Board v. Talmadge, 381 So. 2d 698 (Fla.1980).”
Establishes the jurisdictional basis and the grounds for Supreme Court intervention—a conflict between the Fourth District's decision and controlling Supreme Court precedent.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceReckner filed a petition for certiorari challenging a Fourth District Court of Appeal decision. The case involved claims against Foremost Insurance Co…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Malicious Purpose cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Justice.
This is a petition for certiorari to review a decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, reported at 376 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). We find conflict with our recent decision in District School Board v. Talmadge, 381 So. 2d 698 (Fla.1980). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution (1972), and quash.
We remand to the district court for reconsideration in view of our recent decision in Talmadge and the application of chapter 80-271, Laws of Florida, which amended section 768.28(9).1
It is so ordered.
SUNDBERG, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, ALDERMAN and MCDONALD, JJ., concur. . Section 1 of chapter 80-271, Laws of Florida, amended section 768.28(9), Florida Statutes, to provide in part:
The exclusive remedy for injury or damages suffered as a result of any act, event or omission of any officer, employee, or agent of the state, or its subdivisions or constitutional officers, shall be by action against the governmental entity, or the head of such entity in his official capacity, or constitutional officer of which the officer, employee or agent is an employee, unless such act or omission was committed in bad faith or with malicious purpose or in a manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard of human rights, safety, or property. The state or its subdivisions shall not be liable in tort for the acts or omissions of an officer, employee, or agent committed while acting outside the course and scope of his employment or committed in bad faith or with malicious purpose or in a manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard of human rights, safety, or property. Section 4 of the act provides:
This act shall apply to all actions pending in the trial or appellate courts on the date this act shall take effect and to all actions thereafter initiated.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (77 total)
-
Rogers v. State, 511 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 1987)…ere read to the jury. In the same vein, Rogers argues that the trial court erred in limiting the testimony of John Brigham, an expert in the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. We disagree. This precise issue was considered in Johnson v. State, 393 So. 2d 1069 (Fla.1980). In Johnson, this Court ruled that the trial court’s exclusion of an expert witness who would have testified about the fallibility of eyewitness perception and identification did not constitute an abuse of discretion. Moreover, in this ca…
-
Craig v. State, 510 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1987)…985); Stevens v. State, 419 So. 2d 1058 (Fla.1982), cert, denied, 459 U.S. 1228, 103 S.Ct. 1236, 75 L.Ed.2d 469 (1983); White v. State, 403 So. 2d 331 (Fla.1981), cert, denied, 463 U.S. 1229, 103 S.Ct. 3571, 77 L.Ed.2d 1412 (1983); Johnson v. State, 393 So. 2d 1069 (Fla.1980), cert, denied, 454 U.S. 882, 102 S.Ct. 364, 70 L.Ed.2d 191 (1981); Hoy v. State, 353 So. 2d 826 (Fla.1977), cert, denied, 439 U.S. 920, 99 S.Ct. 293, 58 L.Ed.2d 265 (1978); Douglas v. State, 328 So. 2d 18 (Fla.), cert, denied, 429 U.S. 87…
-
State v. Townsend, 635 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 1994)…t has broad discretion in determining the range of subjects on which an expert witness will be allowed to testify. Glendening v. State, 536 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 1988), cert, denied, 492 U.S. 907, 109 S.Ct. 3219, 106 L.Ed.2d 569 (1989); Johnson v. State, 393 So. 2d 1069 (Fla.1980), cert, denied, 454 U.S. 882, 102 S.Ct. 364, 70 L.Ed.2d 191 (1981). Moreover, if relevant,2 a medical expert witness may testify as to whether, in the expert’s opinion, the behavior of a child is consistent with the behavior of a child who…
Previewing 3 of 77 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Dist. Sch. Bd. OF Lake Cnty. v. Talmadge, 381 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 1980)
- Reckner v. Foremost Ins. Co., 376 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)