Whether the District Court and the Circuit Court erred in applying a case dating from 1981 from a lower Florida Court to hold that JEA was entitled to sovereign immunity as a matter of law, when the Florida Supreme Court had subsequently held that such a determination is fact specific, requiring discovery

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This case involves the granting of summary judgment as a matter of Florida law by the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (the “District Court”) finding that Appellee JEA (f/k/a Jacksonville Electric Authority) (“JEA”) was protected by the principle of sovereign immunity under a Florida statute (Fla. Stat §768.28), the affirmance of that decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (the “Eleventh Circuit”) and the refusal by the Eleventh Circuit to certify to the Florida Supreme Court the question whether applicable Florida case law required a factual inquiry whether sovereign immunity applied in this case. The Questions Presented are: 1. Whether the District Court and the Circuit Court erred in applying a case dating from 1981 from a lower Florida Court to hold that JEA was entitled to sovereign immunity as a matter of law, when the Florida Supreme Court had subsequently held that such a determination is fact specific, requiring discovery, thereby violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the holding in Erie v. Tomkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), and its progeny. 2. Whether the Circuit Court erred in refusing to certify the issue whether JEA was entitled to sovereign immunity as a matter of law to the Florida Supreme Court, which is the final decider of issues of interpretation of Florida law.