Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. McIntyre

680 So. 2d 453, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 284, 1996 WL 17260
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 19, 1996
DocketNo. 95-1251
StatusPublished

This text of 680 So. 2d 453 (Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. McIntyre) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. McIntyre, 680 So. 2d 453, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 284, 1996 WL 17260 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) appeals a temporary restraining order (TRO) and an order denying a motion to dissolve that TRO. FHP sought to interview FHP Captain Terry R. McIntyre relating to a 1989 off-duty automobile accident involving McIntyre’s own personal vehicle. The accident caused no injuries to anyone other than McIntyre and the FHP conducted a review of the accident in 1989. McIntyre filed a suit for declaratory and injunctive relief alleging an unconstitutional invasion of his right to privacy under article I, section 23 of the' Florida Constitution. He sought and obtained a TRO precluding any interview with regard to the accident until his complaint could be adjudicated.

On appeal, FHP seeks a reversal in reliance upon this court’s decisions in Edwards v. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 470 So.2d 9, 10 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 476 So.2d 673 (Fla.1985), and Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Corbin, 527 So.2d 868, 872 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 534 So.2d 399 (Fla.1988), contending that McIntyre is required to answer questions specifically, directly, and narrowly relating to the performance of his official duties, and that he has no legitimate expectations to privacy involving the performance of job-related duties.1 However, in the proceeding below, FHP failed to establish that the information it was seeking from McIntyre involved job-related matters, rather than personal matters in which he has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Thus, although we agree that FHP may interview McIntyre about matters directly relating to the performance of his official duties, we affirm the trial court’s order, as it has not been established that the TRO has no basis in the pleadings and the evidence, or is illegal. Coastal Unilube, Inc. v. Smith, 598 [454]*454So.2d 200 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Zuckerman v. Professional Writers of Florida, 398 So.2d 870 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 411 So.2d 385 (Fla.1981); see also City of Jacksonville v. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co., 634 So.2d 750 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), approved, 659 So.2d 1046 (Fla.1995). Our affirmance is without prejudice, however, to FHP seeking to interview Captain McIntyre with respect to matters which FHP establishes are job-related.

MINER, WOLF and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

Related

DEPT. OF HWY. SAFETY & M. VEH. v. Corbin
527 So. 2d 868 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Edwards v. Dept. of Highway Safety
470 So. 2d 9 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Winfield v. Div. of Pari-Mutuel Wagering
477 So. 2d 544 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1985)
Zuckerman v. Professional Writers of Florida, Inc.
398 So. 2d 870 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Coastal Unilube, Inc. v. Smith
598 So. 2d 200 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Jacksonville v. NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADV.
634 So. 2d 750 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADV. CO. v. Jacksonville
659 So. 2d 1046 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
680 So. 2d 453, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 284, 1996 WL 17260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/department-of-highway-safety-motor-vehicles-v-mcintyre-fladistctapp-1996.