Wilifred v. Metropolitan Dade County
This text of 372 So. 2d 96 (Wilifred v. Metropolitan Dade County) 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.
Opinion
In this action by plaintiffs for damages for wrongful death and for personal injuries, alleged to have been proximately caused by defendants Dade County and the State Department of Transportation, by alleged negligence of said defendants in design, construction and maintenance of a highway and its adjacent area, the trial court entered judgment on the pleadings in favor of said defendants, and the plaintiffs appealed.
Motions of the defendants to dismiss the complaint were denied.1 The answer filed by the defendant Dade County admitted that the accident happened, and “that it has [97]*97insurance coverage for same provided by-the Continental Casualty Company”, and averred that negligence of the driver (the plaintiff Syble Bennett Pedrosa), “was a legal cause in whole or in part for the accident” and that the persons involved were engaged in a joint venture thereby imputing the driver’s negligence to the others. By its answer the defendant Department of Transportation admitted its general duty to the public to inspect the highway system at reasonable intervals for foreseeable dangers, and for the proper design of roadways in its jurisdiction, and to safeguard the same from reasonably foreseeable dangers, but denied that it owed such duties to the plaintiffs; and averred that negligence of the plaintiff driver was the sole, proximate cause of the accident; and claimed immunity as follows: “Defendant asserts this Complaint is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity, notwithstanding the limited waiver of sovereign immunity enacted by the Legislature in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes.”
The questions presented and argued on this appeal were, as stated in appellants’ brief, whether the action against said defendants was precluded by sovereign immunity, and, as stated in the briefs of said defendants-appellees, whether in order to seek recovery the plaintiffs must show said defendants breached a special duty owed to them different from that owed to the public in general and whether said defendants were protected against the action by sovereign immunity.
On consideration of the record, briefs and argument, we hold the appeal has merit, and reverse the judgment on the authority of Welsh v. Metropolitan Dade County, 366 So.2d 518 (Fla.3d DCA 1979), recently decided by this court (No. 78-174, opinion filed January 23, 1979).
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for further proceedings.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
372 So. 2d 96, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilifred-v-metropolitan-dade-county-fladistctapp-1979.