SOL BRANDEIS AND LONA BRANDEIS, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
DADE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 complaint failed to state sufficient facts to overcome Dade County's governmental immunity.
Appellants, plaintiffs below, sued Dade County for failure to promptly remove trash piled adjacent to the street. The trial court dismissed their comp…
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 Political Subdivisions cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellants, who were plaintiffs in the trial court, appeal from an order dismissing their complaint against Dade County. The dismissal was with prejudice upon appellants’ refusal to file an amended complaint. The question presented to the trial court was whether the complaint stated sufficient facts to require an answer. It is apparent from the allegations of the complaint that Dade County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, enjoys governmental immunity 1 from suit. Keggin v. Hillsborough County, 71 Fla. 356, 71 So. 372 (1916). There are exceptions to this rule but appellants do not bring themselves within any of the recognized exceptions. Cf., e. g., State Road Department of Florida v. Tharp, 146 Fla. 745, 1 So.2d 868 (1941).
In addition the activity complained of, the alleged failure to promptly remove trash piled adjacent to the street, is a governmental activity. Cf. Waite v. Dade County, Fla.1954, 74 So.2d 681, 683.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Schmauss v. Snoll, 245 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…el. Dade County v. Dickinson, Fla.1969, 230 So. 2d 130, 131, 136-137, and 138. Metropolitan Dade County as a “political subdivision” of the state partakes of the immunity of the State from tort suits; e. g., Brandeis v. Dade County, Fla.App., 1969, 226 So. 2d 873. Moreover, in companion cases the Second District Court of Appeal has denied recovery as against a municipality for negligent design and maintenance of stop signs by an application of the doctrine immunizing governmental units from tort liability f…1 / 2
-
Surette v. Galiardo, 323 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)…the county and its [*55] agencies are immune from tort liability in the absence of a general statute permitting suit as to such liability. 8 Fla.Jur. Counties § 100; Kaulakis v. Boyd, Fla.1962, 138 So. 2d 505; Brandeis v. Dade County, Fla. App.1969, 226 So. 2d 873; cf. Arnold v. Shumpert, Fla.1968, 217 So. 2d 116. With the enactment of sec. 455.06, F.S., the legislature adopted a general law permitting the county, the school board and certain other governmental entities to purchase liability insurance for cer…
-
Tangela Smith v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 343 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…on of the State of Florida, enjoys governmental immunity from suit unless it waives such immunity by the acquisition of insurance.1 Kaulakis v. Boyd, 138 So. 2d 505 (Fla.1962); Arnold v. Shumpert, 217 So. 2d 116 (Fla.1968); Brandeis v. Dade County, 226 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969); Schmauss v. Snoll, 245 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). It affirmatively appears from the record that there is no insurance coverage as plaintiffs’ complaint as well as Can-tin’s affidavit so states. Affirmed. . It is to be noted…
Authorities Cited
- State Rd. Dep't of Fla. v. Tharp, 146 Fla. 745 (Fla. 1941)
- Keggin v. Cnty. of Hillsborough, 71 Fla. 356 (Fla. 1916)
- Hernando Beach Marine Grp. v. Hernando Cnty. (Fla. 5th DCA 2024)
- Waite v. Dade Cnty., 74 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 1954)