Case ID: so2d_380/html/1169-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Albert INFANDE and Betty Infande, his wife, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, including all purchasers out of possession of condominium units at Apple Green Condominium Apartments I, Individually, jointly and severally, Appellants, v. SELIGMAN OF FLORIDA, INC., Guardian Housing Systems, Inc., Apple Green Condominium Association, Inc., The City of Margate, Arthur Kopelman, Herbert Adler, Gene V. Giarratana and Apple Green Management Corp., Appellees.
    No. 77-975.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    March 12, 1980.
    Robert D. Hurth and Alan Fishman of Robert D. Hurth, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.
    Eugene M. Steinfeld, City Atty., Mar-gate, for appellee, City of Margate.
   PER CURIAM.

Appellants (plaintiffs below) brought an action for negligence, fraud and deceit against the appellee — City of Margate for the manner in which building inspections were conducted by the City’s inspectors and the failure to disclose alleged defects in the buildings upon issuance of certificates of occupancy.

The trial court dismissed the complaint with prejudice and entered a final judgment in favor of the defendant City after the appellants elected not to amend their complaint to attempt to state a cause of action against the City. Although the appellants brought the action under Section 768.28 Florida Statutes (1975) (waiver of sovereign immunity), they alleged insufficient facts to support their contention that this waiver of immunity statute applied against the appellee City.

The effective date of Section 768.28 Florida Statutes (1975) as a waiver of the City of Margate’s immunity was January 1, 1975. Neither the complaint nor the record reveals that the incident giving rise to the cause of action occurred on or after this date.

We agree with the decision of the trial court. Further, the appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error. Under the facts of this case, as stated in the initial complaint and in the record on appeal, we find Modlin v. City of Miami Beach, 201 So.2d 70 (Fla.1967) controlling. We accordingly affirm the decision of the trial court.

DOWNEY, C. J., and MOORE and BER-ANEK, JJ., concur.