MARK BRADFORD INGHAM, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, ET AL., 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.
Florida Supreme Court held that a governmental entity's decisions regarding road design, median configuration, and traffic signal placement constitute planning-level functions immune from negligence liability.
Alleged defects in road construction, median design, and intersection layout constitute judgmental planning-level functions entitled to absolute governmental immunity.
[1] Road design decisions including curve configuration, median positioning and sizing, and traffic signal placement are planning-level governmental functions entitled to abs…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIngham sued the Department of Transportation for negligence in constructing a road with a curve, determining the median's position, shape and size, an…
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 Governmental Immunity cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Justice.
This is a petition to review the decision of the First District Court of Appeal reported as Ingham v. Department of Transportation, 399 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). The case concerns the .alleged negligence of a governmental entity in constructing a road with a curve, in determining the position, shape and size of a median, and in failing to provide adequate traffic signals. This decision requires a determination of whether this conduct constitutes an “operational-level” or a “judgmental, planning-level” governmental function as set out in Commercial Carrier Corp. v. Indian River County, 371 So. 2d 1010 (Fla.1979), and Department of Transportation v. Neilson, 419 So. 2d 1071 (Fla.1982). There is direct conflict with Neilson v. City of Tampa, 400 So. 2d 799 (Fla.2d DCA 1981). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const. We approve the district court’s decision. We hold that the alleged defects in the construction of the road, the median, and the intersection, if in fact they are defects, are defects inherent in the overall plan of the road. Neither these alleged defects nor the failure to install additional traffic control devices is actionable because each is a judgmental, planning-level function to which absolute immunity attaches. Department of Transportation v. Neilson.
It is so ordered.
ALDERMAN, C. J., and BOYD and MCDONALD, JJ., concur. ADKINS and EHRLICH, JJ., dissent.
SUNDBERG, Justice,
dissenting:
I dissent for the reasons expressed in my dissent in Department of Transportation v. Neilson, 419 So. 2d 1071 (Fla.1982).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (20 total)
-
Trianon Park Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. City OF Hialeah, 468 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 1985)…build, expand, or modernize capital improvements such as buildings and roads. See Perez v. Department of Transportation, 435 So. 2d 830 (Fla.1983); City of St. Petersburg v. Collom, 419 So. 2d 1082 (Fla.1982); Ingham v. Department of Transportation, 419 So. 2d 1081 (Fla.1982); Department of Transportation v. Neilson, 419 So. 2d 1071 (Fla.1982). A governmental entity’s decision not to build or modernize a particular improvement is a discretionary judgmental function with which we have held the courts cannot int…
-
Azor J. Everton, Jr. v. Willard, 468 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 1985)…ich should have been grounded on traditional tort principles include Trianon Park; Perez v. Department of Transp., 435 So. 2d 830 (Fla.1983); Harrison v. Escambia County School Bd., 434 So. 2d 316 (Fla.1983); Ingham v. [*951] State Dep’t of Transp., 419 So. 2d 1081 (Fla.1982); and City of St. Petersburg v. Collom, 419 So. 2d 1082 (1982). These cases illustrate the point that the waiver of sovereign immunity does not in itself create liability. As with private parties in like circumstances, the plaintiff must s…
-
Dep't OF Transp. v. Neilson, 419 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 1982)…through its own design.5 For the reasons expressed, I would approve the decision of the district court of appeal. ADKINS, J., concurs. . Department of Transportation v. Neilson, 419 So. 2d 1071 (Fla.1982); Ingham v. Department of Transportation, 419 So. 2d 1081 (Fla.1982); and City of St. Petersburg v. Collom, 419 So. 2d 1082 (Fla.1982). . Compare the statement from Johnson v. State, 69 Cal.2d 782, 798, 73 Cal.Rptr. 240, 251, 447 P. 2d 352, 363 (1968), which case was so heavily relied upon in Commercial C…
Previewing 3 of 20 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Commercial Carrier Corp. v. Indian River Cnty., 371 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 1979)
- Dep't OF Transp. v. Neilson, 419 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 1982)
- Neilson v. City OF Tampa, 400 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
- Ingham v. State of Fla. Dep't OF Transp., 399 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)