CITY OF POMPANO BEACH, APPELLANT,
v.
DONALD STEFANKO, 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.
The court held that the City of Pompano Beach is not liable for prejudgment interest under sovereign immunity, but affirmed the denial of its motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
This case involves a negligence action arising from police intervention in a landlord/tenant dispute. The City of Pompano Beach appealed the trial cou…
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 Waiver Of Sovereign Immunity cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this negligence action arising out of police intervention in a landlord/tenant dispute over removal of property from the leased premises, the City of Pompano Beach (City) appeals from the trial court’s order denying its motion for directed verdict and motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict based on sovereign immunity. The City also appeals the award of prejudgment interest in favor of appellee, Donald Stefanko.
We find no error in the trial court’s denial of these motions and affirm the judgment, but reverse the prejudgment interest award. Appellee concedes that the court erred in awarding him prejudgment interest in direct contravention of Florida Statutes section 768.28(5)(1999). Section 768.28(5) provides, in pertinent part:
The state and its agencies and subdivisions shall be liable for tort claims in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circum stances, but liability shall not include punitive damages or interest for the period before judgment.
“Unlike private tort-feasors, government tort-feasors are not liable for punitive damages or prejudgment interest.” Avallone v. Board of County Comm’rs of Citrus County, 493 So. 2d 1002, 1004 (Fla.1986). See also City of Treasure Island v. Provident Management Corp., 738 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)(the legislature has never waived a City’s immunity from liability for prejudgment interest); State Dep’t of Transp. v. Bailey, 603 So. 2d 1384 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)(an award of prejudgment interest does not fall within the parameters of the waiver of sovereign immunity expressed in section 768.28(5)); Berek v. Metropolitan Dade County, 396 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)(recovery of punitive damages or prejudgment interest is always .precluded under waiver of immunity statute). Accordingly, the prejudgment interest award of $10,415.20 is reversed.
AFFIRMED in part, and REVERSED in part.
FARMER, KLEIN and TAYLOR, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Avallone v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Citrus Cnty., 493 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 1986)
- State v. Bailey, 603 So. 2d 1384 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Berek v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 396 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- State v. Wright, 738 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- City OF Treasure Island v. Provident Mgmt. Corp. & Laurence N. Belair, 738 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)