HECTOR PAREDES AND IBIS R. PAREDES, HIS WIFE, AND RODOLFO YORDI AND DORA C. YORDI, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE CITY OF NORTH BAY VILLAGE AND THE SCHOOL BOARD OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, 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.
Homeowners appealed the dismissal of a nuisance complaint against a city and school board for constructing a baseball field adjacent to their property. The court affirmed the dismissal, finding that both the city's legislative action and the school board's planning-level decision to construct the field were protected by sovereign immunity.
Both the City and School Board are immune from liability under sovereign immunity. The City is immune because there has never been a common law duty of care for legislative action such as the passage of resolutions authorizing expenditures. The School Board is immune because its decision to construct the baseball field constitutes judgmental, planning-level action protected by sovereign immunity.
[1] Legislative action, such as the passage of resolutions authorizing expenditures, is not subject to a common law duty of care, and thus sovereign immunity applies.
[2] A governmental entity's decisions regarding the construction of facilities, including all inherent determinations, are considered judgmental and planning-level, rendering…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Because there has never been a common law duty of care for legislative action, such as the passage of resolutions authorizing expenditures, the trial court correctly granted the City's motion to dismiss.”
Establishes the basis for immunizing the City from nuisance liability for its legislative action
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHector Paredes and Ibis R. Paredes, and Rodolfo Yordi and Dora C. Yordi, filed an amended complaint for nuisance against the City of North Bay Village…
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 Planning-Level Decisions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The plaintiffs below, Hector Paredes, et al., appeal from the dismissal with prejudice of their amended complaint against the City of North Bay Village [City] and the School Board of Dade County, Florida [School Board] based on sovereign immunity. We affirm.
The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint for nuisance against the City and the School Board. As to the City, the nuisance claim was based on the passage of a resolution authorizing the expenditure of $5,000 to construct a baseball field at the elementary school that abuts the plaintiffs’ home. Because there has never been a common law duty of care for legislative action, such as the passage of resolutions authorizing expenditures, the trial court correctly granted the City’s motion to dismiss. See Trianon Park Condominium Ass’n, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 468 So. 2d 912, 919-21 (Fla.1985).
As to the School Board, the claim was based on the School Board’s decision to construct the baseball field. Because the School Board’s decision to construct the baseball field, “and all the determinations inherent in such a decision, are of the judgmental, planning-level type,” the School Board is also immune from liability and therefoi'e, the trial court properly granted the School Board’s motion to dismiss. See Department of Transp. v. Neilson, 419 So. 2d 1071, 1077 (Fla.1982); see also Rumbough v. City of Tampa, 403 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981).
Lastly, this decision should not be interpreted as precluding the plaintiffs from bringing a future action, if necessary, against the defendants for failure to maintain the baseball field.
Affirmed.
NESBITT and GODERICH, JJ., concur.
COPE, Judge
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I concur as to the City of North Bay Village. I respectfully dissent as to the Dade County School Board. The amended complaint alleges that the School Board, by its positioning of the baseball field, has created a severe hazard to neighboring homeowners. “We find that a governmental entity may not create a known hazard or trap and then claim immunity from suit for injuries resulting from that hazard on the grounds that it arose from a judgmental, planning-level decision.” City of St. Petersburg v. Collom, 419 So. 2d 1082, 1086 (Fla.1982). The plaintiffs allegations are sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Trianon Park Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. City OF Hialeah, 468 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 1985)
- Dep't OF Transp. v. Neilson, 419 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 1982)
- City OF ST. Petersburg v. Collom, 419 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 1982)
- Rumbough v. City OF Tampa, 403 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
- Hardison v. State, 403 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)