CITY OF MIAMI, APPELLANT,
v.
CARLOS GUZMAN AND SAMYRA BERRIOS, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS PARENTS AND GUARDIANS OF CAMILLE GUZMAN, 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.
The City of Miami's appeal is granted; the trial court erred in awarding damages to parents both individually and as representatives of their child, when only the representative claim was tried and the statutory cap of $100,000 per person applies.
A trial court must correct a final judgment to reflect only the representative claim where the individual claim was not tried or submitted to the jury, and the statutory damages cap applies per claim, not per capacity.
[1] Under Florida Statutes section 768.28(5), the statutory damages cap of $100,000 applies per claim by any one person, and a trial court must correct a judgment that improp…
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 intelligenceThe Guzmans sued the City of Miami on behalf of their child Camille and in their individual capacity, receiving a $479,962 jury award. The trial court…
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 Negligence (Implied) cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellees sued the City of Miami on behalf of their child and in their individual capacity and received a $479,962.00 jury award. Pursuant to section 768.28(5), Florida Statutes (2010), the maximum damages that the City of Miami is required to pay per claim by any one person is $100,000.00. The City of Miami appeals the trial court’s order compelling two $100,000.00 payments to appellees in both their individual capacity and representative capacity. The City of Miami also appeals the trial court’s order denying its motion to correct the final judgment pursuant to Rule 1.540(a) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.
Although the appellees included both their representative and individual claims in their complaint, the appellees’ claim in their individual capacity was not argued at trial and was thus not before the jury. The appellees’ individual claim was also not noted anywhere on the verdict form. Therefore, it was a mistake to include “Plaintiffs” instead of “Plaintiff’ on the final judgment. The final judgment should be corrected to reflect the singular award in favor of the appellees in their representative capacity on behalf of their child.
We reverse with instructions that the trial court correct the final judgment in accordance with the foregoing, and we vacate the order compelling payment of damages for the appellees’ individual claim.