FPL Not Liable For Hurricane-Related Power Cuts That Caused Deaths at Nursing Home, Florida Court Rules
Does South Florida's only power company owe a duty to supply continuous power to the general public? This appeals court says no.
May 20, 2020 at 04:17 PM
5 minute read
A lawsuit alleging Broward nursing home residents were left to "bake in sweltering heat" after a hurricane-induced power cut lost one defendant Wednesday, when the Fourth District Court of Appeal found Florida Power & Light Co. has no duty to provide a continuous supply of electricity to the general public.
The negligence suit — filed by a resident at Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills LLC — tested the limits of liability for utility companies before and after natural disasters.
Plaintiff Christine Cooper was 79 when Hurricane Irma hit South Florida on Sept. 10, 2017, cutting power at her 152-bed nursing home. Without air conditioning or a generator, 12 elderly residents died and dozens were injured, according to the complaint, which said it took three days for someone to call 911.
As well as suing the nursing home, Cooper alleged South Florida's only power company owed a duty to her and the public "to exercise a high degree of care in the operation and maintenance of its power lines and power grid." She claimed FPL lacked the plans, staff and policies needed to restore power quickly, and that it failed to do routine inspections and follow safety standards.
But the Fourth DCA found Broward Circuit Judge David Haimes was right to grant FPL's motion to dismiss.
"We do not think it is foreseeable that the failure to restore electricity poses an 'unreasonable' risk of harm to the entire population," the opinion said. "We have found no case holding that a utility owes a general duty to the public or noncustomer for a continuous supply of power. Indeed, the few cases which have touched on the issue have all determined that no such duty exists."
|'Enormous liability'
The appellate panel said it couldn't impose such a duty on FPL, as that would essentially make it an insurer of electric and public welfare — something even the plaintiff agrees it isn't.
"Were we to find such a duty, it would open up public utilities to enormous liability for every conceivable injury, both personal and property, which may occur during a power outage," the opinion said. "Such a 'drastic shift' of liability to a public utility is more properly made by the legislature or Public Service Commission."
Wednesday's ruling pointed to a Florida Supreme Court case which held FPL had a duty to fix downed power lines in a non-negligent way, and a duty to warn people if it creates hazardous conditions by temporarily turning off traffic lights, for example.
But that liability didn't extend to natural disasters, when "there clearly is considerably less ability to control any risk associated with an inability to supply power," according to Wednesday's opinion.
Cooper had leaned on the "undertaker doctrine," which governs reasonable care for defendants that have pledged to provide services. But the Fourth DCA found FPL's alleged obligations were too general here, encompassing everyone in South Florida.
"At best, it [the complaint] states that FPL knew of the situation at the center and failed to restore power in time, yet it does not allege that FPL made any specific agreement to restore power immediately to the center or in the three days that passed before the discovery of the residents' conditions," the opinion said.
Scott Schlesinger and Jeffrey Haberman of Schlesinger Law Offices in Fort Lauderdale and Philip Burlington and Adam Richardson of Burlington & Rockenbach in West Palm Beach represent Cooper. Eric Hoecker in Juno Beach, Stuart H. Singer and Evan Ezray of Boies Schiller Flexner in Fort Lauderdale, and Luis Suarez and Mark Heise of Heise Suarez Melville in Coral Gables represent FPL.
They did not respond to a request for comment by deadline.
Hollywood solo practitioner Julie Allison and Dorothy Easley of Easley Appellate Practice in Miami represent the nursing home, which also opposed the trial court's decision to remove FPL.
"We have great respect for the Fourth District Court of Appeal and its decisions," Easley said. "We read this decision to mean that the allegations of the plaintiff's complaint did not trigger a legal duty to the plaintiff as pled and that the decision is limited to this particular complaint. We are still studying the decision for further understanding and any decision about further action."
Fourth DCA Judge Martha Warner wrote the opinion, with Fourth DCA Judge Alan Forst and Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Lisa Walsh sitting by designation.
|Read the ruling:
More appeals:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRogge Dunn Represents Florida Trucking Firm in Civil RICO Suit Against Worldwide Express
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250