Nelson v. Singletary

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nelson v. Singletary

700 So. 2d 768, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11539, 1997 WL 634026

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 15, 1997

DocketNo. 96-03821

StatusPublished

This text of 700 So. 2d 768 (Nelson v. Singletary) 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

Nelson v. Singletary, 700 So. 2d 768, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11539, 1997 WL 634026 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

WHATLEY, Judge.

Michael S. Nelson appeals the dismissal of his complaint with prejudice. Nelson sued Harry K. Singletary, Jr., the Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections, in his individual and his official capacity. Single-tary argues, and we agree, that he is entitled to qualified and sovereign immunity as to these claims. See Jones v. Kirkland, 696 So.2d 1249, 1253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Omasta v. Bedingfield, 689 So.2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). However, Nelson’s complaint also sought injunctive relief. The [769]*769State argues that this claim was properly dismissed because Nelson did not plead an irreparable harm, a clear legal right, an inadequate remedy at law, and consideration of the public interest.

We conclude that Nelson should be given the opportunity to amend his complaint to properly state a claim for injunctive relief. See Omasta, 689 So.2d 409. Therefore, we reverse the dismissal with prejudice of this claim only and remand the case with instructions to permit Nelson to amend his complaint to seek injunctive relief.

LAZZARA, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., concur.

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

WHATLEY, Judge.

Michael S. Nelson appeals the dismissal of his complaint with prejudice. Nelson sued Harry K. Singletary, Jr., the Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections, in his individual and his official capacity. Single-tary argues, and we agree, that he is entitled to qualified and sovereign immunity as to these claims. See Jones v. Kirkland, 696 So.2d 1249, 1253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Omasta v. Bedingfield, 689 So.2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). However, Nelson’s complaint also sought injunctive relief. The [769]*769State argues that this claim was properly dismissed because Nelson did not plead an irreparable harm, a clear legal right, an inadequate remedy at law, and consideration of the public interest.

We conclude that Nelson should be given the opportunity to amend his complaint to properly state a claim for injunctive relief. See Omasta, 689 So.2d 409. Therefore, we reverse the dismissal with prejudice of this claim only and remand the case with instructions to permit Nelson to amend his complaint to seek injunctive relief.

LAZZARA, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

700 So. 2d 768, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11539, 1997 WL 634026, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nelson-v-singletary-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack