From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Kowalski

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
May 19, 1993
617 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Summary

holding State Attorney's Office owed no duty of care to plaintiff arising out of its duty to enforce the laws and promote public safety

Summary of this case from Fernander v. Bonis

Opinion

No. 92-1470.

April 23, 1993. Rehearing Denied May 19, 1993.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Volusia County, Edwin P.B. Sanders, J.

Laurence H. Bartlett of Black, Crotty, Sims, Hubka, Burnett, Bartlett and Samuels, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

B.R. Derfel of Kowalski Derfel, Daytona Beach, for appellees.


The defendant appeals from a final judgment awarding the plaintiffs damages for alleged negligent investigation by a staff investigator of the State Attorney's Office which resulted in the institution of criminal charges against the plaintiff Ronald Kowalski on which he was subsequently exonerated. We reverse for two reasons. First, the defendant State Attorney's Office owed no recognized legal duty of care to the plaintiffs arising out of its duty to enforce the laws and protect the public safety. See Trianon Park Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 468 So.2d 912 (Fla. 1985); Office of the State Attorney for Thirteenth Judicial Circuit v. Powell, 586 So.2d 1180 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), rev. denied, 598 So.2d 77 (Fla. 1992); E.J. Strickland Constr., Inc. v. Dep't of Agric. and Consumer Servs. of Florida, 515 So.2d 1331 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Secondly, the State Attorney's Office is immune from suit on matters relating to its decisions as to whether and how to conduct a criminal investigation. Trianon; see City of Daytona Beach v. Huhn, 468 So.2d 963 (Fla. 1985); Campbell v. City of Coral Springs, 538 So.2d 1373 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). The cause is remanded for entry of judgment in favor of the defendant in accordance with its motion for summary judgment and motions for directed verdict.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Kowalski

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
May 19, 1993
617 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

holding State Attorney's Office owed no duty of care to plaintiff arising out of its duty to enforce the laws and promote public safety

Summary of this case from Fernander v. Bonis

finding state attorney's office had no duty of care to individual in performing internal staff investigation

Summary of this case from King v. State

In Kowalski, without providing a specific factual context, the court wrote that "the State Attorney's office is immune from suit on matters relating to its decision as to whether and how to conduct a criminal investigation."

Summary of this case from Mosby v. Harrell

In State v. Kowalski, 617 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), the plaintiff was awarded damages for the alleged negligence of the state attorney's investigator which resulted in unfounded criminal charges.

Summary of this case from Mosby v. Harrell
Case details for

State v. Kowalski

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF FLORIDA, BY AND THROUGH THE OFFICE OF THE STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: May 19, 1993

Citations

617 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Citing Cases

Mosby v. Harrell

While it might fairly be argued that DNA testing by FDLE is part of a law enforcement investigation, we…

Harris v. Kearney

See Layton v. Florida Dep't of Highway Safety Motor Vehicles, 676 So.2d 1038, 1040-1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (no…