CHARLES E. MOORE, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the dismissal of federal age discrimination claims based on state sovereign immunity under Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents, but reversed the dismissal of state law age discrimination and retaliation claims, which were not time-barred under Joshua v. City of Gainesville.
A state agency is immune from suit under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, but state law age discrimination and retaliation claims are not time-barred and must proceed.
[1] A state agency is entitled to sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment and cannot be sued under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
[2] State law age discrimination and retaliation claims against a state agency are not subject to the same sovereign immunity bar as federal claims and may proceed if not oth…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCharles E. Moore, an employee, brought an action against the Florida Department of Corrections alleging age discrimination and retaliation in employme…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Retaliation In Employment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Charles E. Moore, plaintiff below, brought an action in the circuit court alleging age discrimination and retaliation in employment. Claims were made pursuant to the Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621, and Chapter 760, Florida Statutes. The circuit court entered judgment for the defendant, the Florida Department of Corrections, finding that the state agency was immune from suit under the federal act and that the state claims were time barred. Plaintiff appealed to this court.
Briefing has been stayed at the request of the parties while the decisions upon which the circuit court based its ruling underwent review by higher courts. By motion, the parties inform this court that they now agree that the circuit court’s decision with regard to the federal claims is correct under the rationale of Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents, 528 U.S. 62, 120 S.Ct. 631, 145 L.Ed.2d 522 (2000). Appel-lee, however, concedes error on the state claims in light of Joshua v. City of Gainesville, 768 So. 2d 432 (Fla.2000). Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the trial court regarding the federal claims but reverse and remand for further proceedings on plaintiffs state claims.
AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
WEBSTER, BROWNING and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Kimel v. Fla. Bd. of Regents, 528 U.S. 62 (U.S. 2000)
- Deneace M. Joshua v. City OF Gainesville, 768 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 2000)