MYRNA KAHL, APPELLANT,
v.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, DOING BUSINESS AS VIZCAYA ART MUSEUM, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1964-03-03
No. 63-495
Before BARKDULL, C. J., CARROLL, J., and HARVIE DUVAL, Associate Judge.
162 So. 2d 522 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1964) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

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.

Holding

The court held that failure to present a claim to the county commissioners within one year, as required by statute, bars the action.

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff sued Dade County for personal injuries sustained at a county museum, alleging negligent operation. The county asserted the statute of limita…

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.

Topics
Notice Of Claim Requirements Statute Of Limitations Negligence

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Notice Of Claim Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
CARROLL, Judge.

CARROLL, Judge.

Appellant sued Dade County for personal injuries alleged to have resulted from negligent operation and maintenance of a county museum known as Vizcaya Art Museum, in which plaintiff was a customer and invitee. The accident occurred on April 25, 1959. The complaint was filed April 9, 1963. The county denied negligence, pleaded the statute of limitations and that the plaintiff had not given the county written notice of the claim or injury within the period required by law. The complaint contained no allegation with reference to the giving of notice of claim to the county commissioners. Section 95.08, Fla.Stat, F.S.A., provides as follows:

“Every claim against any county shall be presented to the board of county commissioners within one year from the time said claim shall become due, and shall be barred if not so presented.”

Appellant argues that the notice of claim statute should apply only to governmental functions of the county, and that the museum is a non-governmental function. But that argument falls before the plain language of the statute to the effect that “every claim against any county” shall be presented to the board within one year.

Compliance with that statutory requirement was a prerequisite to the right of action against the county. For the failure to give such notice the action became barred. The trial judge was eminently correct in so concluding, and in ruling for the defendant on its motion for judgment on the pleadings. We affirm the judgment on authority of Whitehurst v. Hernando County, 91 Fla. 509, 107 So. 627.

Affirmed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Fradley v. Cnty. OF Dade, 187 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
    …which is a prerequisite to the right of action against the county. We therefore affirm the order on the authority of Whitehurst v. Hernando County, 91 Fla. 509, 107 So. 627 (1926); Kahl v. Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, Fla.App.1964, 162 So. 2d 522. See also: Rapid Motor Lines, Inc. v. Cox, 134 Conn. 235, 56 A. 2d 519, 175 A.L.R. 296 (1947). Affirmed. . Manning v. Serrano, Fla.1957, 97 So. 2d 688. . Larsson v. Cedars of Lebanon Hospital, 97 Cal.App.2d 704, 218 P. 2d 604 (1950). See also 54…
  • Wright v. Reynolds Fasteners, Inc., 184 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
    …have denied recovery for return of taxes when there has been no compliance with the provisions of a non-claim statute. See: Whitehurst v. Hernando County, 91 Fla. 509, 107 So. 627; Kahl v. Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, Fla.App.1964, 162 So. 2d 522; State ex rel. Victor Chemical Works v. Gay, Fla. 1954, 74 So. 2d 560. In the latter case, the Supreme Court of Florida said the following: * * * * * * “[1] F.S. Section 216.26, F.S.A., is not strictly speaking, a statute of limitations but is mor…
  • Ribler v. Fla. Power & Light Co., 254 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
    …rs to be settled law in this jurisdiction that not only does F.S. Section 95.08, F.S.A. apply to tort claims against a county, Waite v. Dade County, Fla.1954, 74 So. 2d 681; Kahl v. Board of County Com [*239] missioners of Dade County, Fla.App.1964, 162 So. 2d 522 (even when the claim arises as a result of propriety or nongovernmental functions performed by the county, Kahl v. Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, supra), but also that the complaint must allege compliance with the statute as a pre-req…

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw