Case Name: Janet PITTS, Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, Florida, d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1978-10-17
Citations: 374 So. 2d 996
Docket Number: No. 77-1091
Parties: Janet PITTS, Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, Florida, d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital, Appellee.
Judges: Before HENDRY and BARKDULL, JJ., and PARKER, J. GWYNN (Ret.), Associate Judge.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 374
Pages: 996–999

Head Matter:
Janet PITTS, Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, Florida, d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital, Appellee.
No. 77-1091.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Oct. 17, 1978.
On Rehearing Sept. 6, 1979.
Spence, Payne & Masington, Podhurst, Orseck & Parks and Robert Orseck, and Joel Eaton, Miami, for appellant.
Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Knight and James L. Hurley, Miami, for appellee.
Before HENDRY and BARKDULL, JJ., and PARKER, J. GWYNN (Ret.), Associate Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, plaintiff below, appeals from a summary final judgment entered in favor of appellee, defendant below. We affirm.
Appellant, an associate professor at the School of Nursing at the University of Miami, filed a personal injury action against appellee, Dade County, d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital, for alleged negligence in the maintenance, operation and supervision of a parking lot at the hospital complex. The action was bottomed upon an incident in which appellant suffered permanent injuries as a result of a daylight robbery committed by a knife wielding assailant in one of the hospital's parking lots. The parking lot was owned by appellee and patrolled by its employee-security guards.
Appellee filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, which was denied, filed its answer, and, subsequent to discovery, moved for summary judgment. A hearing on the motion was held in which legal memoranda were submitted by the parties following oral argument. Thereafter, the trial judge determined that pursuant to Modlin v. City of Miami Beach, 201 So.2d 70 (Fla.1967) and other authorities, appellant had failed to establish a special duty owed to her by appellee, and entered summary final judgment in favor of appellee.
On appeal, appellant's primary contention is that pursuant to Section 768.28, Florida Statutes (1977), the limited waiver of sovereign immunity statute, the special duty requirement is no longer applicable. As the incident in question occurred after the effective date of the statute, January 1, 1975, appellant argues that facts giving rise to a breach of a general duty is sufficient to sustain a cause of action against appellee. We disagree. The above statutory section waiving sovereign immunity (in limited circumstances) in tort actions for the state, its agencies or subdivisions, is a separate concept from the special duty requirement as expressed in the Modlin decision. While a county may no longer be immune from liability for its tortious conduct, a plaintiff is still saddled with the burden of alleging and proving facts which amount to tortious conduct of a county. As established in Florida, these facts must be such that the negligent breach of duty alleged is something more than the duty owed to the public generally. Cheney v. Dade County, 353 So.2d 623 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). This showing of special duty has not been abrogated by the waiver of sovereign immunity statute. Cheney v. Dade County, supra. Our view of the record is in accord with the view of the trial judge in that we likewise find no breach of a special duty owed to appellant by appellee from the facts giving rise to the incident. As no breach of a special duty has been shown, as a matter of law, appellee cannot be found negligent. Cheney v. Dade County, supra.
Accordingly, appellee being entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law, the judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.