DADE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
HONORABLE PAUL BAKER, JUDGE, CRIMINAL COURT OF RECORD, IN AND FOR DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND GERALD D. HORNBERGER, RESPONDENTS
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.
Dade County sought certiorari review of an order by a trial judge imposing liability on the county for medical expenses incurred by a probationer. The appellate court held that the trial judge lacked jurisdiction over both the subject matter and the county itself, and that any liability for a probationer's medical expenses would rest with the State, not the county.
The trial court lacked jurisdiction over both the subject matter and the county as a party, and even if liability existed for a probationer's medical expenses, it would rest with the State of Florida through the Florida Parole and Probation Commission, not with Dade County. The order was quashed.
[1] A petition for certiorari is an appropriate remedy to seek review of an ex parte order adjudicating a county liable for medical expenses incurred by a probationer.
[2] A trial judge in a criminal proceeding lacks authority to adjudicate civil responsibility for medical expenses incurred by an indigent probationer.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We find no authority in the record for a trial judge in a criminal proceedings to adjudicate civil responsibility for medical expenses incurred by a probationer, even though he may be indigent.”
Establishes the core holding that judges lack jurisdiction to impose such civil liability in criminal proceedings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGerald Hornberger was placed on probation following criminal proceedings after being determined indigent. His probation was supervised by the Florida …
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 Probation Supervision cases and more on FLexlaw
By petition for certiorari, the County [who was not a party before the trial court] seeks review of an ex parte order entered by the respondent, the Honorable Paul Baker, adjudicating the County liable for medical expenses incurred by the respondent, Hornberger, while on probation as the result of a criminal proceedings in *303the Criminal Court of Record in and for Dade County, Florida.
Subsequent to criminal proceedings being instituted by the State against the respondent, Hornberger, he was placed on probation after having been determined to be an indigent. His probation was subject to the supervision of the Florida Parole and Probation Commission, which is a State agency. Thereafter, during the term of probation the respondent, Hornberger, was the recipient of certain medical services by Doctors Hospital, a medical facility in Dade County which, at the request of the respondent, Baker, forwarded its bills for services to him. Thereafter, without notice to the County, the respondent, Baker, entered the order here under review.
We find that the County’s petition for certiorari is the appropriate remedy to seek review of this order. Dade County v. Carr, Fla.App.1970, 231 So.2d 844; Dade County v. Baker, Fla.App.1970, 237 So.2d 545; Dade County v. Strauss, Fla.App.1971, 246 So.2d 137. We find no authority in the record for a trial judge in a criminal proceedings to adjudicate civil responsibility for medical expenses incurred by a probationer, even though he may be indigent. Dade County v. Baker, Fla.App. 1972, 257 So.2d 583. In addition to no jurisdiction over the subject matter, it is apparent that the court had no jurisdiction over the petitioner herein at the time it entered the ex parte order. Ryan’s Furniture Exchange v. McNair, 120 Fla. 109, 162 So. 483; Mayflower Inv. Co. v. Brill, 137 Fla. 287, 188 So. 205; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Suit, 153 Fla. 490, 15 So.2d 33; 6 Fla.Jur., Constitutional Law, § 322. Further, even if adequate due process had been observed and even if there might be some liability to a probationer for medical expenses [which, without statutory authority, we seriously doubt], then the agency that would be liable would be the State of Florida1 through the Florida Parole and Probation Commission and not the petitioner, Dade County. The respondent, Horn-berger, was not under the supervision of an agency of Dade County during his probation, but was under the supervision of a State agency.
Wherefore, for the reasons above stated, the order here under review dated July 23, 1971, adjudicating liability against the petitioner (County) in favor of Doctors Hospital, be and the same is hereby quashed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Ryan's Furniture Exch., Inc. v. McNair, 120 Fla. 109 (Fla. 1935)
- Mayflower Inv. Co. v. Brill, 137 Fla. 287 (Fla. 1939)
- Bogle v. State, 246 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)
- W. Union Tel. Co. v. Suit, 153 Fla. 490 (Fla. 1943)
- Dade Cnty. v. Hilton Carr, 231 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)
- Echols v. State, 201 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Anthony Esperti v. The Honorable J. H. Willson, 250 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 1971)
- In re Est. of Rosella M. Sager, 201 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)
- Dade Cnty. v. Honorable Paul Baker, 237 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)
- Dade Cnty. v. Honorable Paul Baker, 257 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)