DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES v. BARNETT (2019)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

State of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, Florida Department of Children and Families and City of Riviera Beach, a Florida Municipal Corporation, Appellants, v. Michael BARNETT, Individually, as Natural Father and Guardian of R.B., a Minor, and as the Personal Representative of the Estates of Daniel Barnett, Diane Barnett and Bryan Barnett, and Leroy Nelson, Jr., as Personal Representative of the Estate of Javon Xavier Nelson, a Minor, Appellees.

No. 4D17-2840

Decided: January 09, 2019

Sheridan Weissenborn of Dutton Law Group, P.A., Miami, for appellant Department of Financial Services. H.T. Smith of the Law Offices of H.T. Smith, P.A., Coral Gables, and John W. McLuskey of McLuskey, McDonald & Hughes, P.A., Miami, for appellee Michael Barnett. Vincent E. Miller of the Law Offices of Vincent E. Miller, P.A., Delray Beach, for appellee Leroy Nelson, Jr.

On Motion to Certify Question of Great Public Importance

Unfortunately, our state has experienced a number of high-profile mass shootings in the past several years, some of which have led to negligence complaints against state agencies. In our opinion in the instant case, we narrowly construed section 768.28(5), Florida Statutes (2010), to limit the sovereign immunity waiver to $200,000 ¹ when there are multiple claims arising out of the same negligent act(s) committed by the state agency. However, we acknowledge that a broader reading of the statute could allow a per injury limitation.

Because this issue may continue to arise in the context of mass shootings and other mass injury events, we certify the following question as one of great public importance:

WHEN MULTIPLE CLAIMS OF INJURY OR DEATH ARISE FROM THE SAME ACT OF NEGLIGENCE COMMITTED BY A STATE AGENCY OR ACTOR, DOES THE LIMITATION ON THE WAIVER OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY IN SECTION 768.28(5), FLORIDA STATUTES, CAP THE LIABILITY OF STATE AGENCIES AT $200,000 FOR ALL RESULTING INJURIES OR DEATHS, AS CLAIMS AND JUDGMENTS “ARISING OUT OF THE SAME INCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE”?

FOOTNOTES

1. The statute was amended in 2016 to increase the cap to $300,000 for all claims or judgments.

Per Curiam.

Warner, May and Forst, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network