Faust v. City of North Port

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Faust v. City of North Port

529 So. 2d 1167, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1593, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2905, 1988 WL 69392

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 6, 1988

DocketNo. 87-3188

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 529 So. 2d 1167 (Faust v. City of North Port) 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

Faust v. City of North Port, 529 So. 2d 1167, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1593, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2905, 1988 WL 69392 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs’ amended complaint alleges that they were injured as a result of drag racing on a municipal street. The thrust of their complaint against the city was that the city’s failure to enforce laws and ordinances caused their injuries. The trial court dismissed their complaint, and they appeal. We affirm.

Basic to recovery in tort is the establishment of a duty. The plaintiffs here have failed to allege that crucial element. Law enforcement’s duty to protect citizens is a general one owed to the community at large and not to a specific individual. A government entity has the discretionary power to enforce compliance of laws by methods it determines appropriate. The assumption that a particular form of city action might have prevented injury to the plaintiffs does not establish the common-law duty required to hold the city liable. Trianon Park Condominium Ass’n v. City of Hialeah, 468 So.2d 912, 919 (Fla.1985); Everton v. Willard, 468 So.2d 936, 938 (Fla.1985); Carter v. City of Stuart, 468 So.2d 955, 957 (Fla.1985). As we explained in Neumann v. Davis Water and Waste, Inc., 433 So.2d 559, 563 (Fla.2d DCA 1983), to hold otherwise would make government the insurer of those injured when laws and regulations are violated.

Affirmed.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs’ amended complaint alleges that they were injured as a result of drag racing on a municipal street. The thrust of their complaint against the city was that the city’s failure to enforce laws and ordinances caused their injuries. The trial court dismissed their complaint, and they appeal. We affirm.

Basic to recovery in tort is the establishment of a duty. The plaintiffs here have failed to allege that crucial element. Law enforcement’s duty to protect citizens is a general one owed to the community at large and not to a specific individual. A government entity has the discretionary power to enforce compliance of laws by methods it determines appropriate. The assumption that a particular form of city action might have prevented injury to the plaintiffs does not establish the common-law duty required to hold the city liable. Trianon Park Condominium Ass’n v. City of Hialeah, 468 So.2d 912, 919 (Fla.1985); Everton v. Willard, 468 So.2d 936, 938 (Fla.1985); Carter v. City of Stuart, 468 So.2d 955, 957 (Fla.1985). As we explained in Neumann v. Davis Water and Waste, Inc., 433 So.2d 559, 563 (Fla.2d DCA 1983), to hold otherwise would make government the insurer of those injured when laws and regulations are violated.

Affirmed.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

529 So. 2d 1167, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1593, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2905, 1988 WL 69392, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/faust-v-city-of-north-port-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack