Spooner v. Department of Corrections

514 So. 2d 1077, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 499
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedSeptember 24, 1987
Docket68932, 68522
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 514 So. 2d 1077 (Spooner 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
Spooner v. Department of Corrections, 514 So. 2d 1077, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 499 (Fla. 1987).

Opinion

514 So.2d 1077 (1987)

Robert Edward SPOONER, Petitioner,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent.
Maurice Skoblow, Petitioner,
v.
AMERI-MANAGE, INC., et al., Respondents.

Nos. 68932, 68522.

Supreme Court of Florida.

September 24, 1987.
Rehearing Denied December 1, 1987.

*1078 F. Kendall Slinkman, West Palm Beach, and Edna L. Caruso, P.A., West Palm Beach, for petitioner, Spooner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Mitchell D. Franks, Chief Trial Counsel and Thomas H. Bateman, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent, Dept. of Corrections.

Ira J. Kurzban of Kurzban, Kurzban and Weinger, Miami, and Joel V. Lumer, Miami, for Nat. Emergency Civil Liberties Committee, amicus curiae.

Stephen T. Maher, Coral Gables, and Sharon L. Wolfe, Miami, for American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Florida, Inc., amicus curiae.

Robert Weisberg of Lipman & Weisberg, P.A., Miami, and Sharon L. Wolfe of Cooper, Wolfe & Bolotin, P.A., Miami, for petitioner, Skoblow.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Mitchell D. Franks, Chief Trial Counsel and Craig Willis, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondents, Ameri-Manage, Inc., et al.

OVERTON, Justice.

The First District Court of Appeal, in Spooner v. Department of Corrections, 488 So.2d 897 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), certified the following question to this Court:

Has the State of Florida, pursuant to Section 768.28, Florida Statutes (1983), waived its Eleventh Amendment and state common law immunity and consented to suits against the State and its agencies under 42 U.S.C. § 1983?

Id. at 898.

The above case was consolidated with Skoblow v. Ameri-Manage, Inc., 483 So.2d 809 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), which concerns the identical issue, without certification of the question. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4).

We answer the question in the negative for the reasons expressed in our recent decision in Hill v. Department of Corrections, 513 So.2d 129 (Fla. 1987).

We approve the decision of the First District Court of Appeal in Spooner and that of the Third District Court of Appeal in Skoblow, holding the state immune under the eleventh amendment and the common law from suits arising under the federal Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

It is so ordered.

McDONALD, C.J., and EHRLICH, SHAW, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Board of Regents of State v. Snyder
826 So. 2d 382 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Suarez v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement
774 So. 2d 772 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Malone v. City of Satellite Beach
717 So. 2d 1067 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Stephens v. Geoghegan
702 So. 2d 517 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Stewart v. Sun Sentinel Co.
695 So. 2d 360 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Howlett Ex Rel. Howlett v. Rose
496 U.S. 356 (Supreme Court, 1990)
Williams v. Metropolitan Dade County
561 So. 2d 470 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Hamm v. Powell
874 F.2d 766 (Eleventh Circuit, 1989)
Lloyd v. Ellis
520 So. 2d 59 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Chapman v. STATE, DEPT. OF HEALTH & REHAB. SERV.
517 So. 2d 104 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
514 So. 2d 1077, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spooner-v-department-of-corrections-fla-1987.