Two Discussion replies needed:

1) The administrative agency of which a plaintiff may bring a tort case I chose was the Environmental Protection Agency. Torte law allows people to sue for damages due to loss of property, injury or death because of something done or overlooked. The Environmental Protection Agency is bound by an obligation to look out for the interest of the environment and the humans and animals that live there. When there is not proper oversight, the consequences can be devastating.

On February 13th of this year, various environmental activist groups made the EPA aware of their intent to sue. A petition had been gathered that asked the EPA to provide better oversight on the regulation of radioactive materials produced by phosphate mining and the creation of fertilizer. The petition was produced in 2021 by 17 conservation and environmental organizations and aimed to protect people's health and the well-being and preservation of the environment. (Center for Biological Diversity n.d.)

There is a lot of concern about the radioactive waste and dangerous levels of chemicals are contributing to health issues for people who live near where phosphate mining takes place. Individual people who have been sickened could collectively sue the EPA. The agency can be penalized and plaintiffs awarded punitive damages.

2) An example of a Florida tort that a plaintiff might bring against an administrative agency in Florida would be one against a medical agency such as the Agency for Persons with Disabilities (APD). In March of 2011 there was an implementation of a cost plan freeze by the agency. Another agency, Disability Rights Florida noticed that there was a trend of administrative delay and non-responsiveness by the Agency for Persons with Disabilities towards service requests by clients of the Medicaid Developmental Disability Waiver, in some cases requests gone over 90 days or more without a substantive response of whether the service request would be granted or denied (Disability Rights Florida, 2013). The complaint alleged that the Agency for Persons with Disabilities was failing to provide medical assistance to waiver clients with reasonable promptness as required by federal Medicaid law, and that each individual named plaintiff had requested services under crisis and had been without a response for over six months due to delays as the result of agency inaction and/or repeated requests for additional documents or additional evaluations (Disability Rights Florida, 2013). In addition to any amount of monetary judgement given to the plaintiffs, there are also administrative changes that were enacted as the plaintiffs and the APD entered into a settlement agreement, that provided a broad and positive impact on the APD's methodology for tracking and responding to service requests by clients of the waiver (Disability Rights Florida, 2013).