JOHN R. BROXSON, APPELLANT,
v.
DONALD S. LAVIGNE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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.
This case involves an appeal by a former sheriff regarding personal liability for goods purchased for his office. The court affirmed the summary judgment against him, finding him personally liable for the unpaid debt.
Yes, the sheriff is personally liable for the debt. The court held that the sheriff's defense was insufficient to avoid personal liability.
“There is no doubt from the pleadings, depositions and admissions in the file that the defendant ordered and received the goods and that they have not been paid for.”
Establishes the undisputed facts regarding the order, receipt, and non-payment of goods.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant, a former Sheriff, ordered and received goods for his office but did not pay for them. His defense was that the goods were purchased in …
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.
The defendant, who was formerly Sheriff of Santa Rosa County, appeals a summary final judgment against him for goods sold to him while he was Sheriff. There is no doubt from the pleadings, depositions and admissions in the file that the defendant ordered and received the goods and that they have not been paid for. Appellant’s defense consisted of the following answer:
“ * * * and in further answer thereto alleges that the defendant sometime during on or about the months of February and March of 1960, purchased from the plaintiffs certain merchandise in and pursuant to his official position as sheriff of Santa Rosa County, Florida; that said merchandise was sold by the plaintiff to the defendant as sheriff of Santa Rosa County and that it was agreed and understood by and bo-ween the parties that the plaintiff would look to the sheriffs office of Santa Rosa County, Florida for payment thereof and not to the defendant John R. Broxson.”
The record on appeal shows no genuine issue upon these allegations because it appears without controversy that during the year in which this indebtedness was incurred, all budgeted funds were received by the Santa Rosa County Sheriff’s Office; yet, the defendant failed to pay his obligation to. the plaintiff. Under such facts the defendant is personally liable. See § 30.49, Fla. Stat., F.S.A.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Abusaid v. Hillsborough Cnty. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs, 405 F.3d 1298 (11th Cir. 2005)…tate [is] in fact obligated to bear and pay the resulting indebtedness”). Although the state is not hable for a judgment against a sheriff, the county appears not to be liable in all cases, either. For example, in Broxson v. Donald S. Lavigne, Inc., 153 So. 2d 343 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1963), a Florida court held that the sheriff was personally liable for goods he had ordered and had received, where all budgeted funds had been received by the sheriffs office but nevertheless he had not paid for the goods. Neverth…