Broward County v. La Rosa
505 So. 2d 422 (1987)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A local government ordinance cannot empower an administrative agency to award unliquidated common law damages, such as compensation for humiliation and embarrassment, because doing so usurps a purely judicial function in violation of the separation of powers doctrine and infringes upon the constitutional right to a jury trial.
Facts:
- Pursuant to its charter, Broward County enacted a Human Rights Ordinance to protect citizens from various forms of discrimination.
- The ordinance created an administrative agency known as the Broward County Human Rights Board (board).
- The ordinance empowered the board to order a person found to have engaged in a discriminatory practice to pay the complainant actual damages, including compensation for humiliation and embarrassment.
- Clifton G. Smith, a black man, filed a complaint with the board alleging that John La Rosa refused to lease him an apartment because of his race.
Procedural Posture:
- Clifton G. Smith filed a discrimination complaint against John La Rosa with the Broward County Human Rights Board.
- The Board determined La Rosa had engaged in a discriminatory practice and ordered him to pay Smith $4,000 as compensation for humiliation and embarrassment.
- La Rosa filed suit against Broward County in the Broward County Circuit Court (a trial court), seeking to declare the ordinance unconstitutional.
- The circuit court entered a summary judgment in favor of La Rosa, ruling the ordinance was unconstitutional.
- Broward County, as the appellant, appealed the decision to the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal.
- The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court's judgment.
- Broward County then petitioned the Supreme Court of Florida for review.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a county ordinance that empowers a local administrative agency to award unliquidated common law damages for humiliation and embarrassment to victims of discrimination violate the Florida Constitution's separation of powers doctrine and the right to a trial by jury?
Opinions:
Majority - McDonald, Chief Justice
Yes. A county ordinance empowering an administrative agency to award unliquidated damages for humiliation and embarrassment violates the Florida Constitution. The power to adjudicate disputed facts and award unliquidated common law damages for personal injuries like humiliation is a purely judicial function, not a quasi-judicial one. Delegating this power to an administrative agency violates the separation of powers mandated by Article II, Section 3 of the Florida Constitution. Furthermore, this arrangement infringes on the right to a jury trial guaranteed by Article I, Section 22, because actions for unliquidated damages were traditionally tried by jury at common law. While the goal of eliminating discrimination is laudable, it cannot be pursued through unconstitutional means.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the boundary between permissible quasi-judicial powers of administrative agencies and the core functions reserved for the judiciary. By declaring that the award of unliquidated, non-economic damages is a purely judicial function, the court significantly limited the remedial powers of local human rights boards and similar administrative bodies in Florida. The ruling ensures that claims for such damages must be brought in a court of law, preserving the separation of powers and safeguarding the defendant's constitutional right to a jury trial. This precedent forces legislatures and local governments to structure administrative remedies carefully, distinguishing between quantifiable damages (like back pay) and non-quantifiable, common law damages.
Unlock the full brief for Broward County v. La Rosa