FLORIDA AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ST. JOHN MEDICAL PLANS, INC., ETC., APPELLEE
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 Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) appealed the denial of its motion for change of venue after St. John Medical Plans sued it for wrongfully terminating St. John's Medicaid contract. The court reversed in part, holding that venue for claims against AHCA must be in Leon County (the agency's principal headquarters) rather than Dade County, but allowing other defendants to remain in Dade.
Venue in civil actions against a state agency properly lies in the county where the agency maintains its principal headquarters, absent waiver or exception. The characterization of St. John's claim as inverse condemnation does not create an exception to this rule, as the claim is fundamentally a breach of contract action. Accordingly, the action against AHCA must be transferred to Leon County.
[1] Venue in civil actions against the state or its agencies lies where the state or agency maintains its principal headquarters, absent waiver or exception.
[2] The "sword wielder doctrine" is inapplicable when there is no actual or threatened invasion of rights by the state.
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“It has long been the established common law of Florida that venue in civil actions brought against the state or one of its agencies or subdivisions, absent waiver or exception, properly lies in the county where the state agency, or subdivision maintains its principal headquarters.”
Establishes the foundational venue rule for actions against state agencies
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSt. John Medical Plans, a Medicare HMO, had its Medicaid contract terminated by AHCA in June 1995. St. John then filed suit in Dade County against AHC…
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 Breach Of Public Trust cases and more on FLexlaw
NESBITT, Judge.
In this action by St. John Medical Plans Inc. (St. John), a corporation licensed to operate a Medicare health maintenance organization, against a state agency, Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA), and others, AHCA appeals the denial of its motion for change of venue or in the alternative, dismissal. We reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.
The event precipitating the instant action was the termination of St. John’s Medicaid contract in June 1995. St. John thereafter filed the instant complaint alleging in part that AHCA had wrongfully taken St. John’s property. Count I alleged the claim against AHCA for “unconstitutional taking”; Count II alleged a civil rights claim against AHCA director Douglas Cook; Count III alleged gross negligence against Cook; Count IV made claims for tortious interference with St. John’s business relationship against defendants Physicians Corporation of America (PCA), a corporation engaged in providing managed care in Florida, as well as Alberto Gutman, a member of the Florida legislature; Count V made a claim against Gutman for breach of public trust.
According to St. John’s complaint, venue was proper in Dade because the property involved in the litigation was located in Dade, the government agency’s actions occurred in Dade, St. John’s causes of action accrued here, the majority of the wrongful acts of the defendants occurred here, at least two of the defendants are Dade residents, and St. John’s damages were sustained here.
It has long been the established common law of Florida that venue in civil actions brought against the state or one of its agencies or subdivisions, absent waiver or exception, properly lies in the county where the state agency, or subdivision maintains its principal headquarters. Carlile v. Game & Fresh Water Fish Comm’n, 354 So. 2d 362 (Fla.1977). As the supreme court observed in Carlile, such a rule promotes orderly and uniform handling of state litigation and helps to minimize expenditure of public funds and manpower. Id. at 363.
Although the count aimed at AHCA is postured as though it were for a claim of inverse condemnation, argued as one of the exceptions to the above-stated rule, see In re Forfeiture of 1976 Kenworth Tractor, 576 So. 2d 261 (Fla.1990), this nomenclature fails to survive analysis. The “property interest” allegedly taken by the agency, is in reality if anything, the final installment of a 12-month contract. Characterizing the claim as an inverse condemnation will not convert what appears to be a pure breach of contract action into something more.
For that reason, we conclude that the home venue privilege survives in favor of the state agency. The agency was not a “sword-wielder” under the substance of the allegations of the complaint. See Monroe County v. Graham, 493 So. 2d 74, 75 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (holding “sword wielder exception not applicable as there was no actual or threatened invasion of rights by the state, and plaintiffs suit was not in the nature of a shield against the state’s thrust”). Likewise, the agency cannot be characterized as a joint tortfeasor. See School Board v. James E. Rose Mechanical Contractors, Inc., 604 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). The trial court should have severed the action against the agency from the remaining defendants and on the agency’s motion, transferred the action with respect to AHCA to Leon County. Id. Accordingly, we reverse in part and direct that upon remand this cause as it affects AHCA be transferred. As to the other defendants, the case shall proceed in Dade. See Department of Transportation v. Bromante, 365 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978).
Reversed in part, and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fish & Wildlife Conservation Comm'n v. Wilkinson, 799 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…, 610 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (holding sword-wielder exception does not apply to breach of contract and § 1983 claims because allegations of complaint defeat due process claims); Fla. Agency for Health Care Admin. v. St. John Med. Plans, Inc., 674 So. 2d 911, 912 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (noting that “[c]harac-terizing the claim as an inverse condemnation will not convert what appears to be a pure breach of contract action into something more”). The purpose of the home venue privilege given to state agencies…
-
State v. Lindquist, 698 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…ve considered the Department’s argument that appellees have attempted to transform actions for breach of contract into lawsuits for violation of constitutional rights. In Florida Agency for Health Care Administration v. St. John Medical Plans, Inc., 674 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), the state agency terminated the plaintiffs contract before the end of its term. The plaintiff responded by filing a lawsuit raising, among other things, an inverse condemnation claim. The court held that a final installment in a…
-
Dep't OF Corr. v. Ross, 680 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…itation to bid “due to legislative budget cuts and staff reduction.” DOC asserts that based upon these alleged facts venue properly lies in Leon County. We agree and find Florida Agency for Health Care Administration v. St. John Medical Plans, Inc., 674 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) controlling. In St. John, St. John’s Medicaid contract was terminated by AHCA. St. John filed a complaint in the circuit court alleging an “unconstitutional taking,” civil rights violations, gross negligence, tortious interferenc…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Carlile v. Game & Fresh Water Fish Comm'n of the State of Fla., 354 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 1977)
- In re Forfeiture OF 1976 Kenworth Tractor Trailer Truck, 576 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 1990)
- State of Fla. Dept. OF Transp. v. Bromante, 365 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- Monroe Cnty. v. Governor Bob Graham, 493 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Sch. Bd. OF Osceola Cnty. v. James E. Rose Mech. Contractors, Inc., 604 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)