GILBERTO ARCIA, AS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND OF BLANCA ARCIA, A MINOR, AND GIIBERTO ARCIA, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANTS,
v.
ALTAGRACIA CORPORATION, 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.
Summary judgment for landlord affirmed where child suffered only fright from falling ceiling material with no physical impact, as Florida law precludes recovery for mental distress unconnected to physical injury in simple negligence cases.
A plaintiff cannot recover for mental pain and anguish unconnected with physical injury in a negligence action involving simple negligence.
[1] In a simple negligence action, mental pain and anguish unconnected with physical injury is not compensable.
Previewing 1 of 1 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“There can be no recovery for mental pain and anguish unconnected with physical injury in an action arising out of the negligent breach of a contract whereby simple negligence is involved.”
Supreme Court precedent establishing the rule that mental distress requires accompanying physical injury in simple negligence cases.
Tenants of an apartment building owned by defendant brought suit when the owner's seven-year-old daughter suffered shock and mental distress when bath…
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 Physical Injury Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal is from a summary final judgment entered for the defendant by the Circuit Court of Dade County in an action brought by Gilberto Arcia, individually and for his seven year old daughter, Blanca Arcia, a minor.
It appeared from the pleadings and depositions that the plaintiffs were the tenants of an apartment house owned by the defendant when the minor plaintiff suffered shock and mental distress when a portion of the bathroom ceiling fell and almost struck her while she was in the bathroom.
The defendant moved for a summary judgment on the ground that the undisputed evidence showed that there was no impact upon the child’s body by any ceiling material and that the injuries, if any, were caused solely by fright. It was upon that ground that the trial court granted the motion. Plaintiffs contend that such showing did not entitle defendant to a summary judgment. We think it did and affirm.
Our Supreme Court in Kirksey v. Jernigan, Fla.1950, 45 So.2d 188 said:
“This court is committed to the rule, and we reaffirm it herein, that there can *866be no recovery for mental pain and anguish unconnected with physical injury in an action arising out of the negligent breach of a contract whereby simple negligence is involved.”
See also, Slocum v. Food Fair Stores of Florida, Fla. 1958, 100 So.2d 396.
No reversible error has been made to appear, the summary final judgment appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stewart v. Gilliam, 271 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972)…emotional disturbance without physical effect. In other words, we are not herein concerned with any action for recovery for mental or emotional disturbance unconnected with a resulting physical injury. Arcia v. Altagracia Corporation, Fla.App. 1972, 264 So. 2d 865. Instead, we are concerned with a defendant’s wrongful act without direct physical impact but which occasions a mental disturbance that operates internally to produce physical injuries of a definite, objective and ascertainable nature. 38 Am. Jur.2d…
Authorities Cited
- Kirksey v. Jernigan, 45 So. 2d 188 (Fla. 1950)
- Julia Slocum and Homer v. Slocum, 100 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 1958)