Tober v. Sanchez, s. 81-742
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
| Citation | 417 So.2d 1053 |
| Docket Number | 81-1858,Nos. 81-742,s. 81-742 |
| Parties | Ronald J. TOBER, Director of Metropolitan Dade County Transit Agency and Metropolitan Dade County, Appellants, v. Isabel SANCHEZ, Appellee. Ofelia ESCOBEDO, Appellant, v. Ronald J. TOBER, Director of Metropolitan Dade County Transit Agency and Metropolitan Dade County, Appellees. |
| Decision Date | 27 July 1982 |
Page 1053
v.
Isabel SANCHEZ, Appellee.
Ofelia ESCOBEDO, Appellant,
v.
Ronald J. TOBER, Director of Metropolitan Dade County Transit Agency and Metropolitan Dade County, Appellees.
Third District.
Rehearing Denied Aug. 30, 1982.
Page 1054
Robert A. Ginsburg, County Atty., and John E. Finney, Asst. County Atty., for Ronald J. Tober and Metropolitan Dade County.
Stabinski, Funt, Levine & Vega, Scherman & Zelonker and Regina F. Zelonker, Miami, for Isabel Sanchez and Ofelia Escobedo.
Before SCHWARTZ, NESBITT and JORGENSON, JJ.
NESBITT, Judge.
These consolidated appeals involve the identical question as to whether the official charged by law with the maintenance of public records pursuant to Section 119.021, Florida Statutes (1979), may transfer actual physical custody of the records to the County Attorney and thereby avoid compliance with a request for inspection under the Public Records Act, Chapter 119, Florida Statutes (1979). We answer this question in the negative.
Both cases had their genesis when attorneys for potential claimants against the Metropolitan Dade County Transit Agency (Agency) sought inspection of the accident records and reports emanating from separate Agency bus accidents. The requests for inspection were denied and the attorneys instituted mandamus proceedings against Ronald J. Tober, as Director of the Agency, and Metropolitan Dade County (County). In Case No. 81-742, the trial court granted a peremptory writ of mandamus ordering compliance with the demands for inspection; while in Case No. 81-1858, the writ was denied and the application therefor quashed.
Tober and the County have presented three arguments in this court. First, they contend that since Tober no longer has actual possession of the records sought, he is not the custodian of the records for purposes of permitting inspection under Section 119.07(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1979). However, there is no doubt but that Tober, as Director of the Agency, is the officer "charged by law with the responsibility of maintaining the office" and is consequently the custodian of the subject records. § 119.021, Fla.Stat. (1979). Section 119.01, Florida Statutes (1979), expresses this state's policy that such records "shall at all times be open for a personal inspection by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tribune Co. v. Cannella, 82-1635
...records to the state attorney's office, thereby rendering it temporarily unable to comply with petitioner's request. Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). However, there is no simple solution to this problem. The city clearly had a duty to comply with the subpoena and, furthe......
-
Times Pub. Co., Inc. v. City of St. Petersburg, WTSP-T
...to review documents. By these actions, the City improperly delegated its record keeping functions to the White Sox. See Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied, Metropolitan Dade County Transit Agency v. Sanchez, 426 So.2d 27 (Fla.1983) (Official charged by law wi......
-
City of Orlando v. Desjardins, 67195
...(Fla.1985); Orange County; Hillsborough County Aviation v. Azarelli Construction Co., 436 So.2d 153 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied, 426 So.2d 27 (Fla.1983). Each of these courts noted the imbalanced posture and the disadvantaged status......
-
Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County, s. 81-2394
...which, if any, constitute "work-product" materials and are required to be disclosed under the Public Records Act. Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The court is directed to retain copies of all records examined as sealed exhibits, so that either of the parties may thereaf......
-
Privileges
...legal advice are privileged in the hands of the attorney only if they were privileged in the hands of the client. Tober v. Sanchez , 417 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). 10.2.4.4 No Privilege if Documents Within Criminal/Fraud Exception In a case alleging that the firm breached its fiduciary ......