STATE OF FLORIDA, BY AND THROUGH THE OFFICE OF THE STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, APPELLANT,
v.
RONALD EDMUND KOWALSKI, SR., BLUMIE ROSE DERFEL-KOWALSKI, HIS WIFE AND KRISTEN BLUMIE KOWALSKI, THEIR DAUGHTER, APPELLEES
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 appellate court reversed judgment against State Attorney's Office, holding that prosecutors owe no duty of care to citizens injured by negligent criminal investigations and are immune from suit for investigative decisions.
The State Attorney's Office owes no recognized legal duty of care to citizens arising from its law enforcement duties and is immune from suit regarding decisions on whether and how to conduct criminal investigations.
[1] A state attorney's office performing law enforcement functions owes no recognized legal duty of care to citizens and is immune from suit regarding decisions on whether an…
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 intelligenceRonald Kowalski was charged with a crime based on a negligent investigation by a State Attorney's Office investigator and was subsequently exonerated.…
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 Negligent Investigation cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
The defendant appeals from a final judgment awarding the plaintiffs dam ages for alleged negligent investigation by a staff investigator of the State Attorney’s Office1 which resulted in the institution of criminal charges against the plaintiff Ronald Kowalski on which he was subsequently exonerated. We reverse for two reasons. First, the defendant State Attorney’s Office owed no recognized legal duty of care to the plaintiffs arising out of its duty to enforce the laws and protect the public safety. See-Trianon Park Condominium Ass’n, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 468 So. 2d 912 (Fla.1985); Office of the State Attorney for Thirteenth Judicial Circuit v. Powell, 586 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), rev. denied, 598 So. 2d 77 (Fla.1992); E.J. Strickland Constr., Inc. v. Dep’t of Agriec. and Consumer Servs. of Florida, 515 So. 2d 1331 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Secondly, the State Attorney’s Office is immune from suit on matters relating to its decisions as to whether and how to conduct a criminal investigation. Tria-non; see City of Daytona Beach v. Huhn, 468 So. 2d 963 (Fla.1985); Campbell v. City of Coral Springs, 538 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). The cause is remanded for entry of judgment in favor of the defendant in accordance with its motion for summary judgment and motions for directed verdict.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . See § 27.255, Fla.Stat.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Elminer Harris v. Kearney, 786 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…y to maintain accurate records of compliance with the laws regulating driving motor vehicles). A case that is factually similar to the instant case where no duty was found is Office of the State Attorney for the Seventh Judicial Circuit v. Kowalski 617 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). In Kowalski a staff investigator negligently investigated a case, resulting in criminal charges. The fifth district held, in part, that the State Attorney’s Office owed no duty of care to the individual defendant arising out of…
-
Storm v. The Town OF Ponce Inlet, 866 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…. denied, 725 So. 2d 1109 (Fla.1998); Garcia v. Reyes, 697 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); White v. City of Waldo, 659 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995), rev. denied, 667 So. 2d 774 (Fla.1996); State By and Through Office of State Attorney v. Kowalski, 617 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 626 So. 2d 1367 (Fla.1993); Farabee v. Rider, 995 F.Supp. 1398 (M.D.Fla.1998); Johnson v. Cannon, 947 F.Supp. 1567 (M.D.Fla.1996). I. Existence of a Common Law Duty. The negligent retention or supervision of an incompe…
-
Mosby v. Harrell, 909 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…airly be argued that DNA testing by FDLE is part of a law enforcement investigation, we reject the notion that law enforcement investigative activities enjoy blanket immunity. The first fifth district case on which FDLE relies is State v. Kowalski, 617 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). In Kow-alski, without providing a specific factual context, the court wrote that “the State Attorney’s office is immune from suit on matters relating to its decision as to whether and how to conduct a criminal investigation.” Ko…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Trianon Park Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. City OF Hialeah, 468 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 1985)
- City OF Daytona Beach v. Huhn, 468 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1985)
- E.J. Strickland Constr., Inc. v. Dep't OF Agric. & Consumer Servs. OF Fla., 515 So. 2d 1331 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- State v. Powell, 586 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Campbell v. City OF Coral Springs, 538 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)