# Moore v. Department of Corrections

> District Court of Appeal of Florida · September 26, 2001 · 794 So. 2d 764

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7743756

## Case

- **Full name:** Charles E. MOORE v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, State of Florida
- **Court:** District Court of Appeal of Florida
- **Decided:** September 26, 2001
- **Citations:** 794 So. 2d 764; 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 13410; 2001 WL 1132676
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Browning, Polston, Webster
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7743756

## Opinion text

PER CURIAM.
Appellant Charles E. Moore, plaintiff below, brought an action in the circuit court alleging age discrimination and retaliation in employment. Claims were made pursuant to the Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621 , and Chapter 760, Florida Statutes. The circuit court entered judgment for the defendant, the Florida Department of Corrections, finding that the state agency was immune from suit under the federal act and that the state claims were time barred. Plaintiff appealed to this court.
Briefing has been stayed at the request of the parties while the decisions upon which the circuit court based its ruling underwent review by higher courts. By motion, the parties inform this court that they now agree that the circuit court’s decision with regard to the federal claims is correct under the rationale of Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents, 528 U.S. 62 , 120 S.Ct. 631 , 145 L.Ed.2d 522 (2000). Appel-lee, however, concedes error on the state claims in light of Joshua v. City of Gainesville, 768 So.2d 432 (Fla.2000). Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the trial court regarding the federal claims but reverse and remand for further proceedings on plaintiffs state claims.
AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
WEBSTER, BROWNING and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7743756. Public record. Not legal advice.