Woods v. City of Palatka
| Decision Date | 27 February 1953 |
| Citation | 63 So.2d 636 |
| Parties | WOODS v. CITY OF PALATKA. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Chas. J. Kapfer and Edward L. Bush, Palatka, for appellant.
Walton & Walton, J. V. Walton and Kate L. Walton, Palatka, for appellee.
The real question here is on the constitutionality of the following provision of the Charter of the City of Palatka, appellee here, being Section 93 of Chapter 9875, Laws of Florida, Special Acts of 1923:
'The City of Palatka shall not be liable for personal injuries due to defective condition, excacations, or obstructions in streets, sidewalks, alleys, avenues, parks or public grounds, nor shall it be liable for acts of omission, commission, mis-feasance or non-feasance of its officers or employees.'
The question arose in proceedings instituted by the appellant against the appellee to recover for injuries sustained by her in falling into a hole in the sidewalk which, it was alleged, the city negligently permitted to 'remain in a badly broken and unsafe condition and repair * * * thereby making said sidewalk unsafe and dangerous for public travel.' Upon the city's motion to dismiss, the lower court held that 'the validity of such exemption from liability as set forth in said Section 93 seems not to be forbidden by the organic law of the State of Florida and within the power of the legislature to grant; and further that the authority to the siad City with reference to the repair and upkeep of sidewalks is permissive rather than mandatory, and the duty for such upkeep is placed by the legislative act primarily on the owners of lots abutting on sidewalks and footways; * * *.' The lower court thereupon dismissed the complaint, and this appeal followed.
At the outset, it should be noted that the fact that the City may, by ordinance, require the owners of lots to construct or repair sidewalks in front of their lots and, upon their failure to do so, may then have such sidewalks constructed and charged against such owners as a lien against the lot, did not relieve the city of its duty to exercise reasonable diligence in repairing defects in sidewalks. City of Pensacola v. Jones, 58 Fla. 208, 50 So. 874; City of Key West v. Baldwin, 69 Fla. 136, 67 So. 808. Nor is the city, in such circumstances, relieved of its liability for negligence in the discharge of this duty. City of Pensacola v. Jones, supra.
On the general question of the constitutionality of a statute which relieves a municipality from liability for torts, there is a divergence in the judicial opinions by courts in other jurisdictions. See the cases collected in the annotation in 124 A. L.R. beginning at page 350. In this jurisdiction, the repair and upkeep of the streets of a municipality 'is a corporate function, for the abuse of which, by the negligence or wrongful conduct of its...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cauley v. City of Jacksonville
...cities were liable for damages resulting from the negligent operation and maintenance of city streets and sidewalks. Woods v. City of Palatka, 63 So.2d 636 (Fla.1953) (pothole in road); City of Miami Beach v. Quinn, 149 Fla. 326, 5 So.2d 593 (1942) (depression in road surface); City of Tall......
-
Commercial Carrier Corp. v. Indian River County
...performing a like-type act. If the function was perceived to be purely governmental, however, immunity attached. See Woods v. City of Palatka, 63 So.2d 636 (Fla.1953); City of Miami v. Oates, 152 Fla. 21, 10 So.2d 721 (1942); Peavey v. City of Miami, 146 Fla. 629, 1 So.2d 614 (1941); Rogers......
-
Jorstad v. City of Lewiston
...cause of action to overlook those statutes. Such laws have been held to constitute an unjust discrimination, e. g., Woods v. City of Palatka, 63 So.2d 636 (Fla.1953); to be applicable only to contract claims, e. g., Griffin v. City of Lewiston, 6 Idaho 231, 55 P. 545 (1893); to be tolled by......
-
Coudry v. City of Titusville
...delegate or relinquish its duty to maintain its streets and to keep them in safe repair. They rely on cases such as Woods v. City of Palatka, 63 So.2d 636 (Fla.1953), Singleton v. City of Jacksonville, 107 So.2d 47 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958), and Finkelstein v. Brooks Paving Company, 107 So.2d 205......