Skip to main content

Keck v. Eminisor

Citations

  • 104 So. 3d 359
  • 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 697
  • 2012 WL 5516053
  • 2012 Fla. LEXIS 2353

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • explaining that under § 768.28(9)(a) the denial of summary judgment based on individual immunity must be immediately appealable because if it were not, “that statu- tory protection [would] become[] essentially meaningless for the individual defendant”
  • “[W]e do not utilize the common law writ of certiorari for review of a claim of individual immunity.”
  • Florida Statute section 768.28(9)(a), which bars an individual state officer or employee from being named as a defendant in a tort action1
  • in cases where an employee acts with bad faith or malicious purpose, “the plaintiff can recover only from the employee, not from the State.”
  • “[W]e review a pure question of law de novo.”
  • “[W]e review a pure question of law de novo.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Canady, Labarga, Lewis, Only, Pariente, Perry, Polston, Quince

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

57 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Keck v. Eminisor

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.