EUGENE MCGUCKIN, FATHER OF DENNIS MCGUCKIN, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DADE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL. DEFENDANTS
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 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District, declined to answer a certified question from the Circuit Court of Dade County regarding whether the county could be sued for negligence in maintaining its right-of-way. The court found the question was not properly before it for determination.
The court declined to answer the certified question.
“May Dade County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, be sued in tort for alleged negligence in maintaining one of its rights-óf-way pursuant to Section 8.03 of its Charter, which, inter alia, provides: " 'Tort Liability. The county shall be liable in actions of tort to the same extent that municipalities in the State of Florida are liable in actions in tort.', in spite of Section 22, Article III of the Florida Constitution, which states: " 'Suits against state. — Provision may be made by general law for bringing suit against the State as to all lia [*64] bilities now existing or hereafter originating.', if the County does not carry insurance covering such alleged liability and its immunity has not been waived by a general act of the Florida legislature."”
This is the certified question presented to the court.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDade County's charter states it is liable in tort to the same extent as municipalities. However, the Florida Constitution generally requires legislati…
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 Certified Question Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
There has been certified to this court by the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, for determination, pursuant to Rule 4.6, Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A., the following question:
“May Dade County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, be sued in tort for alleged negligence in maintaining one of its rights-óf-way pursuant to Section 8.03 of its Charter, which, inter alia, provides:
“ ‘Tort Liability. The county shall be liable in actions of tort to the same extent that municipalities in the State of Florida are liable in actions in tort.’,
in spite of Section 22, Article III of the Florida Constitution, which states:
“ ‘Suits against state. — Provision may be made by general law for bringing suit against the State as to all lia*64bilities now existing or hereafter originating.’,
if the County does not carry insurance covering such alleged liability and its immunity has not been waived by a general act of the Florida legislature.”
The circuit court has the power to adjudicate the question, the decision upon which may be reviewed by direct appeal to the Supreme Court of Florida as a matter of right under Section 4(2) of Article V of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A. See Chapman v. Slaff, Fla.App.19S8, 101 So.2d 413, and City of Hollywood v. Peck, Fla. 1952, 57 So.2d 842. Therefore, we decline to answer the question as being one that is not within the rule enunciated in Schwob Co. of Fla. v. Florida Industrial Commission, 152 Fla. 203, 11 So.2d 782, and similar cases.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sigmund T. Jaworski v. The City OF Opa-Locka, 149 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 1963)…tion of the District Courts of Appeal, numerous questions have been certified to those courts for answer. Cf., Davies v. Davies, 113 So. 2d 250; Clar v. Dade County, 116 So. 2d 34; In re Aron’s Estate, 118 So. 2d 546; McGuckin et al. v. Dade County, 121 So. 2d 63. In McGuckin the District Court of Appeal declined to answer the certified question because it presented a proposition which required the construction of a controlling provision of the State Constitution. If decided by the circuit court, the propos…
-
Wallace v. Cochran, 349 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…truction of a controlling provision of the state or federal constitutions, must be addressed to the Supreme Court of Florida and not to a district court of appeal. Jaworski v. City of Opa Locka, 149 So. 2d 33, 35 (Fla.1963); McGuckin v. Dade County, 121 So. 2d 63 (Fla.8d DCA 1960). We do not have jurisdiction to consider the certified questions in this case because they involve in part a construction of controlling provisions of the state and federal constitutions. If the circuit court passed on these quest…
Authorities Cited
- Schwob Co. of Fla. v. Fla. Indus. Comm'n, 152 Fla. 203 (Fla. 1942)
- Gertrude Chapman v. Slaff, 101 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)