From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Quilling v. County of Sumter, Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jan 8, 1999
726 So. 2d 795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Opinion

No. 97-3069

Opinion filed January 8, 1999

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sumter County, Victor J. Musleh, Judge.

Gary C. Quilling, Bowling Green, pro se.

John C. Cooper, David B. Switalski of Cooper, Coppins Monroe, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellee, County of Sumter.

William R. Waters, Jr. of Skelding, Labasky, Corry, Eastman, Hauser, Jolly Metz, Tallahassee, for Appellees Adams, Goodwin, Everage, Thompson, Moffitt, Moore, Lister, Maddox, Merritt, Strong, and Amann.


Gary Quilling challenges several rulings entered by the trial court in his lawsuit against Sumter County and several Sumter County deputy sheriffs. Mr. Quilling's claims of liability all arise from actions allegedly taken against him by deputy sheriffs while he was incarcerated at the Sumter County detention center. The challenged rulings include: 1) the order dismissing the claims against several individual defendants; 2) the order vacating the default judgment entered against the county; 3) the order striking Mr. Quilling's claim for punitive damages; and 4) the summary judgment order entered against Mr. Quilling. We reverse the summary judgment order entered in favor of the individual deputy sheriffs, but affirm without comment the summary judgment entered in favor of the county, as well as the court's other rulings.

The trial court's role in summary judgment proceedings is not one of weighing the evidence or passing on the credibility of witnesses. Instead, it is a means of efficiently disposing of those actions in which there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to receive a judgment as a matter of law. See Odham v. Foremost Dairies, Inc., 128 So.2d 586 (Fla. 1961). Our review of the instant record reveals that material issues of fact exist with regard to Mr. Quilling's claims that, while incarcerated at the Sumter County detention center, he was battered, his personal property was converted, and that he was punished in violation of his rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Accordingly, we must reverse the summary judgment and remand this matter for further proceedings.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

GRIFFIN, C.J., and COBB, J., concur.


Summaries of

Quilling v. County of Sumter, Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jan 8, 1999
726 So. 2d 795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)
Case details for

Quilling v. County of Sumter, Florida

Case Details

Full title:GARY C. QUILLING, Appellant, v. COUNTY OF SUMTER, FLORIDA, etc., et al.…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Jan 8, 1999

Citations

726 So. 2d 795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Citing Cases

Speedway Superamerica v. Dupont

This policy is expressly incorporated in section 760.11(5), which provides that in civil actions brought…

Speedway Superamerica, LLC v. Dupont

This policy is expressly incorporated in section 760.11(5), which provides that in civil actions brought…