Zisis v. Signal Safe, Inc.
A state university professor serving as principal investigator on FDOT-funded wind testing was sued for ordinary negligence by a device manufacturer whose products tested poorly. The Third District held that section 768.28(9)(a) barred the claim because the complaint's own exhibits (the contracts and work orders) showed the professor acted within the scope of employment, and an ordinary negligence claim cannot overcome individual employee immunity absent bad faith, malicious purpose, or wanton and willful disregard.
Key facts
- A state university professor serving as principal investigator on an FDOT-funded wind testing project was sued by a device manufacturer for ordinary negligence, alleging the professor's testing caused poor product performance results.
- The complaint alleged the professor exceeded the scope of employment and engaged in unlicensed engineering, but attached contracts and work orders showed the professor acted in a contractual capacity as principal investigator with the university as financial beneficiary.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Useful authority for defense counsel representing individual public employees: it confirms that scope-of-employment immunity can be decided at the pleading stage when contractual exhibits attached to the complaint… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.