& SC13-1874 Enock Plancher, etc. v. UCF Athletics Association, Inc. and Enock Plancher, etc. v. UCF Athletics Association, Inc.
175 So. 3d 724
| Fla. | 2015Background
- Ereck Plancher died during UCF football conditioning in 2008; parents sued UCF and UCFAA for negligence.
- Trial court denied UCFAA’s motion for summary judgment, finding UCFAA not entitled to 768.28 immunity.
- Jury awarded Planchers $10 million against UCFAA; Fifth District reversed, holding UCFAA entitled to limited sovereign immunity.
- Fifth District directed judgment against UCFAA be reduced to the statutory cap of $200,000; excess to be pursued by legislative action.
- Supreme Court approves UCFAA’s limited immunity but quashes the Fifth District’s automatic $200,000 reduction and remands for entry of a judgment capped at $200,000, with excess to be addressed by the Legislature.
- Court analyzes factual control and structure showing UCFAA primarily acts as an instrumentality of UCF, limiting UCFAA’s liability under 768.28.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether UCFAA is an instrumentality of the state entitling 768.28 immunity | Planchers: UCFAA not sufficiently controlled by UCF to qualify. | UCFAA primarily acts as an instrumentality of UCF and thus entitled to immunity. | UCFAA entitled to limited immunity; instrumentality analysis favoring UCF control. |
| What level of government control is required for immunity | Actual day-to-day control required by statute. | Right of control suffices given UCF’s structural and budgetary control. | Control analysis favors immunity; not necessary to require only actual control. |
| Appropriate scope of liability under 768.28(5) cap | Judgment should reflect full jury award subject to cap only per statute. | Liability limited to $200,000 under the cap. | Remand for judgment consistent with cap; excess remains for legislative remedy. |
Key Cases Cited
- Shands Teaching Hospital & Clinics, Inc. v. Lee, 478 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (limits autonomy; day-to-day control influences immunity)
- Betterson, 648 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (substantial independence but constrained day-to-day operations)
- Pagan v. Sarasota County Public Hospital Board, 884 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (structure dictates control; hospital board vs. group immunity)
- Keck v. Eminisor, 104 So. 3d 359 (Fla. 2012) (agency/instrumentality analysis under 768.28(2))
- Pinellas County v. Bettis, 659 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (remedial structure for cap-based reductions under 768.28)