DIANE SCOTT
v.
DANIEL ZIEG
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.
A tort action against a state employee must comply with Florida's notice and claim presentation requirements under section 768.28(6), and the complaint must allege such compliance; absent allegations of bad faith, malicious purpose, or wanton and willful disregard, the employee is immune from personal tort liability.
[1] A complaint against a state employee must contain an allegation that the claimant presented a written claim to the appropriate agency within three years of accrual as a c…
[2] A state employee or agent is immune from personal tort liability for acts or omissions within the scope of employment unless the complaint alleges facts showing the emplo…
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 intelligence“the requirements of notice to the agency and denial of the claim pursuant to paragraph (a) are conditions precedent to maintaining an action”
Statutory requirement establishing that compliance with notice procedures is mandatory before suit can proceed against the state
Diane Scott appealed a dismissal of her tort action against Daniel Zieg, a state employee, from Monroe County Court. Scott failed to allege that she h…
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.
Opinion filed January 10, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-0147 Lower Tribunal No. 22-61-M
________________
Diane Scott,
Appellant,
vs.
Daniel Zieg,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the County Court for Monroe County, James W. Morgan, III, Judge. Diane Scott, in proper person. Carr Allison, and Austin C. Sherman and Alison H. Sausaman (Jacksonville), for appellee. Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and SCALES, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See § 768.28(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (2022) (providing in part: “An action may not be instituted on a claim against the state or one of its agencies or subdivisions unless the claimant presents the claim in writing to the appropriate agency. . . within 3 years after such claim accrues . . . .”); §
768.28(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2022) (providing that “the requirements of notice to the agency and denial of the claim pursuant to paragraph (a) are conditions precedent to maintaining an action”); Menendez v. North Broward Hosp.
Dist., 537 So. 2d 89, 90 (Fla. 1988) (“Under section 768.28(6), not only must the notice be given before a suit may be maintained, but also the complaint must contain an allegation of such notice.”) See also § 768.28(9)(a), Fla. Stat. (2022) (providing in part: “An officer, employee, or agent of the state or of any of its subdivisions may not be held personally liable in tort or named as a party defendant in any action for any injury or damage suffered as a result of any act, event, or omission of action in the scope of her or his employment or function, unless such officer, employee, or agent acted in bad faith or with malicious purpose or in a manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard of human rights, safety, or property.”); Gay v. Jupiter Island
Compound, 358 So. 3d 780, 788 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023) (the court is limited to the four corners of plaintiff’s complaint when determining, at this stage of the proceedings, whether a state employee or agent is entitled to immunity under section 768.28); Peterson v. Pollack, 290 So. 3d 102, 105 (Fla. 4th DCA
2020); Preudhomme v. Bailey, 211 So. 3d 127, 132 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Scott v. Zieg, 358 So. 3d 780 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)…her or his employment or function, unless such officer, employee, or agent acted in bad faith or with malicious purpose or in a manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard of human rights, safety, or property.”); Gay v. Jupiter Island Compound, 358 So. 3d 780, 788 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023) (the court is limited to the four corners of plaintiff’s complaint when determining, at this stage of the proceedings, whether a state employee or agent is entitled to immunity under section 768.28); Peterson v. Pollack, 290…
-
Harrison v. Kimarie Stratos (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)…tion over the order denying the claim of immunity under section 768.28(9). Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(F)(ii). We have certiorari jurisdiction to consider Defendants’ claim of common law absolute immunity. See Gay v. Jupiter Island Compound, LLC, 358 So. 3d 780, 786 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023). For certiorari relief, Defendants must show that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law resulting in material injury that cannot be corrected on postjudgment appeal. Id. We review the purely lega…
-
Harrison v. Kimrie Stratos (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)…tion over the order denying the claim of immunity under section 768.28(9). Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(F)(ii). We have certiorari jurisdiction to consider Defendants’ claim of common law absolute immunity. See Gay v. Jupiter Island Compound, LLC, 358 So. 3d 780, 786 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023). For certiorari relief, Defendants must show that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law resulting in material injury that cannot be corrected on postjudgment appeal. Id. We review the purely lega…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Menendez v. N. Broward Hosp. Dist., 537 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 1988)
- Scot Peterson v. Pollack, 290 So. 3d 102 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)
- Preudhomme v. Garth F. Bailey, 211 So. 3d 127 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
- Scott v. Zieg, 358 So. 3d 780 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)