Opinion ID: 3063617
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: State Law Negligence Argument

Text: Secondo’s negligence argument requires us to apply Florida law. See 28 U.S.C. § 1652; Esfeld v. Costa Crociere, S.P.A., 289 F.3d 1300, 1306-07 (11th Cir. 10 2002). The Florida courts have consistently and unambiguously held that “it is not possible to have a cause of action for negligent use of excessive force because there is no such thing as the negligent commission of an intentional tort.” City of Miami v. Sanders, 672 So. 2d 46, 48 (quotation marks omitted), review denied, 683 So. 2d 484 (Fla. 1996); see also Comm’r of Internal Revenue v. Estate of Bosch, 387 U.S. 456, 465, 87 S. Ct. 1776, 1782 (1967) (“[A]n intermediate appellate state court is a datum for ascertaining state law which is not to be disregarded by a federal court unless it is convinced by other persuasive data that the highest court of the state would decide otherwise.”) (quotation marks, citation, and alterations omitted). That said, “a separate negligence claim based upon a distinct act of negligence may be brought against a police officer in conjunction with a claim for excessive use of force, . . . [but] the negligence component must pertain to something other than the actual application of force during the course of arrest.” Sanders, 672 So. 2d at 48 (citation omitted).