Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. S.A.P.
Florida Supreme Court
835 So. 2d 1091 (2002)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
S.A.P. (defendant) was a foster child under the supervision and care of the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) (plaintiff), a state agency. In 1979, law enforcement discovered that S.A.P., then only four years old, had been abused and severely neglected by her foster parents. After the abuse was discovered, HRS actively interfered with the police investigation, altered records, and falsified reports to conceal HRS’s negligent supervision of S.A.P. HRS’s internal investigation of S.A.P.’s abuse was not completed until 1992. S.A.P. filed a negligence claim against HRS in 1995 after attaining the age of majority. HRS moved to dismiss S.A.P.’s claim, arguing that it was time-barred by the applicable four-year statute of limitations. S.A.P. countered, arguing that the doctrine of equitable estoppel barred HRS from raising a statute-of-limitations defense because HRS’s fraudulent concealment of material facts involving S.A.P.’s abuse and HRS’s negligent supervision prevented S.A.P. from filing her negligence claim within the four-year statute of limitations. The trial court dismissed S.A.P.’s claim as untimely. S.A.P. appealed. The appellate court reversed, holding that S.A.P.’s claim was timely because HRS’s fraudulent concealment tolled the statute of limitations. HRS appealed to the Florida Supreme Court, arguing that the doctrine of equitable estoppel was inapplicable to tort claims filed against state agencies.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Shaw, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.