H6511 is a claims bill that provides relief to L.P., a minor, through an appropriation from the General Revenue Fund after a court found the Department of Children and Families (DCF) negligent in its handling of a child welfare response. The bill recounts that DCF was notified after a wellness check request involving L.P.’s mother, but failed to identify warning signs or implement a safety plan that could have placed L.P. with her grandmother. According to the bill, L.P. remained in her mother’s custody and was then severely injured in an attempted murder shortly afterward.
The bill appropriates $28 million to DCF for payment to Sidney and Valerie Carey, L.P.’s grandparents and adoptive parents, to be placed in a special needs trust for L.P.’s exclusive benefit. It also states that the payment, together with the amount already paid under Florida’s sovereign immunity cap in section 768.28, Florida Statutes, is intended to be the sole compensation for all present and future claims arising from the incident. The bill further limits attorney fees, lobbying fees, and similar expenses to no more than 25 percent of the award.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would create a one-time, special appropriation outside the ordinary claims process to compensate L.P. for injuries and damages resulting from DCF’s negligence. It does not broadly amend child welfare law or sovereign immunity statutes, but it operates within Florida’s claims bill framework by authorizing payment above the statutory liability cap and directing the Chief Financial Officer to issue the warrant. The measure affects DCF financially and establishes a special needs trust mechanism for disbursement of the funds on L.P.’s behalf.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests strong support for the bill, as it passed the House Civil Justice & Claims Subcommittee unanimously, 18-0. The bill text itself is highly sympathetic, emphasizing the severity of L.P.’s injuries, the long-term medical and psychological consequences, and the prior court findings against DCF. No committee transcript was provided, but the unanimous vote indicates little visible opposition at the subcommittee stage.
Contention
The main point of contention is not whether the injury occurred, but whether the state should be required to pay a large claims bill above the normal sovereign immunity cap and in what amount. The bill also reflects the underlying criticism that DCF caseworkers failed to recognize danger signs and failed to implement a safety plan, which is the basis for the negligence finding. Any debate would likely center on state fiscal responsibility, the appropriateness of a $28 million appropriation, and the statutory limit on fees and related expenses.