FROM THE KING TO THE COLONIES
within the scope of their employment, it provides full compensation to those
injured by “commonplace negligence,” but not for people whose claims in-
volve intentional torts or strict liability
Although the FTCA’s numerous
exceptions have made the statute somewhat confusing, it successfully pro-
vided “a traversable bridge across the moat of sovereign immunity.
IV. Sovereign Immunity in Florida
At the state level, most jurisdictions have embraced sovereign immunity
Florida has recognized it both in case law and the state constitution
Pereira v. State Rd. Dep’t.,
for example, it was held that because it is “fun-
damental that a sovereign state may not be sued without its consent,” one
cannot sue the State Road Department
Valdez v. State Rd.
, it was said that “it is elementary that the State is a sovereign and
cannot be sued without its consent.
In 1973, the Florida legislature passed its equivalent of the FTCA and
waived state sovereign immunity for actions in tort
Under Section 768.28
15 See Paul F. Figley,
Understanding the Federal Tort Claims Act: A Different Metaphor
. at 1106 (citing
Jaffee v. United States
18 “Provision may be made by general law for bringing suit against the state as to all
liabilities now existing or hereafter originating.”
Shuey v. State of Mich.
21 Larry A. Klein & Brad A. Chalker,
Developments in Florida’s Doctrine of Sovereign