J. ALLEN, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND JOHN E. ALLEN, APPELLANTS,
v.
HUMANA OF FLORIDA, INC., D/B/A HUMANA WOMEN'S HOSPITAL-TAMPA, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this appeal from summary judgment in a breach of contract case, J. Allen, Inc. and its president John E. Allen challenged a judgment against Allen for negligent misrepresentation regarding payment applications. The court reversed, holding that negligent misrepresentation claims in breach of contract cases require proof of personal injury or property damage beyond economic losses resulting from the breach itself.
A negligent misrepresentation tort claim in a breach of contract case requires appropriate pleadings and proof of conduct resulting in personal injury or property damage beyond the breach of the contract and resulting economic loss. Because the appellee claimed only economic losses, summary judgment for the appellant was appropriate.
[1] A tort claim within a breach of contract action requires pleading and proof of personal injury or property damage beyond the breach of contract and resulting economic los…
[2] Economic losses resulting solely from a breach of contract are not actionable in tort.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“To have an actionable tort claim in a breach of contract case, there must be appropriate pleadings and proof of conduct resulting in personal injury or property damage beyond the breach of the contract and resulting economic loss.”
Establishes the controlling legal standard for tort claims in breach of contract cases, requiring damages beyond mere economic loss from the breach.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJ. Allen, Inc., the general contractor for a hospital building project in Tampa, submitted monthly applications for payment signed by its president, J…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Contract Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
DANAHY, Judge.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment in a breach of contract suit brought by the appellee against the corporate appellant who was the general contractor of a building project at the appellee’s hospital in Tampa. The individual appellant, John E. Allen, is the president of the corporate appellant. Of the multi-count complaint, Mr. Allen brings for our review the only count containing a claim against him as an individual. The summary judgment on this count was in favor of the appellee who was the party seeking affirmative relief on an issue of liability. We have jurisdiction. Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv). We reverse.
In this count, the appellee charged that Mr. Allen negligently misrepresented amounts due his company when he signed, in his role as president, several monthly applications for payment. Allegedly, the negligent misrepresentations were that the computation method employed in arriving at the amount due was the correct alternative of the methods allowed in the contract, the alternative which produced the lesser payment due for that month. On cross-motions for summary judgment, the trial court denied the appellant’s but granted the appellee’s. We find that the court should have entered summary judgment for the appellant instead.
To have an actionable tort claim in a breach of contract case, there must be appropriate pleadings and proof of conduct resulting in personal injury or property damage beyond the breach of the contract and resulting economic loss. AFM Corp. v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., 515 So. 2d 180 (Fla.1987); Strickland-Collins Constr. Co. v. Barnett Bank, 545 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); John Brown Automation, Inc. v. Nobles, 537 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). There is no such pleading and proof in the appellee’s claim. The only damages the appellee claims are the economic losses resulting from, the breach of contract conduct ascribed to the appellants.
Accordingly, we reverse the entry of final judgment in favor of the appellee and remand with instructions that the trial court grant the appellant’s motion for summary judgment.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
RYDER, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- AFM Corp. v. S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 515 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1987)
- John Brown Automation, Inc. v. Nobles, 537 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)
- Strickland-Collins Constr. v. Barnett Bank OF Naples, 545 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)