Burnett v. Department of Corrections

Supreme Court of Florida

Burnett v. Department of Corrections

666 So. 2d 882, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 22, 1996 Fla. LEXIS 13, 1996 WL 9723

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedJanuary 11, 1996

DocketNo. 85635

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 666 So. 2d 882 (Burnett v. Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burnett v. Department of Corrections, 666 So. 2d 882, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 22, 1996 Fla. LEXIS 13, 1996 WL 9723 (Fla. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have for review the following question passed upon by the First District Court of Appeal and certified to be of great public importance:

WHETHER THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS MAY BE HELD LIABLE AS A RESULT OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF AN ESCAPED PRISONER?

Department of Corrections v. Burnett, 653 So.2d 1102, 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We recently answered the identical question in Vann v. Department of Corrections, 662 So.2d 339 (Fla.1995), in the negative by holding the Department of Corrections “could not be held liable for the criminal acts of an escaped prisoner because no common law duty was owed by the department to protect a particular individual from such potential harm.” Id. at 340. We likewise answer the certified question in this case in the negative and approve the district court’s decision.

It is so ordered.

GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We have for review the following question passed upon by the First District Court of Appeal and certified to be of great public importance:

WHETHER THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS MAY BE HELD LIABLE AS A RESULT OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF AN ESCAPED PRISONER?

Department of Corrections v. Burnett, 653 So.2d 1102, 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We recently answered the identical question in Vann v. Department of Corrections, 662 So.2d 339 (Fla.1995), in the negative by holding the Department of Corrections “could not be held liable for the criminal acts of an escaped prisoner because no common law duty was owed by the department to protect a particular individual from such potential harm.” Id. at 340. We likewise answer the certified question in this case in the negative and approve the district court’s decision.

It is so ordered.

GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

666 So. 2d 882, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 22, 1996 Fla. LEXIS 13, 1996 WL 9723, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burnett-v-department-of-corrections-fla-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack