Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress

1,636 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 8 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Paulk v. Nat'l Med. Enters. Inc.
  679 So. 2d 1289· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-09-25 ·cited 12×
  Presuit notice and investigation requirements of Florida's medical malpractice statute (chapter 766) apply to claims alleging fraudulent extension of medical treatment based on insurance coverage rather than medical necessity, even when framed as intentional torts rather than neg
• Ross v. Twenty-Four Collection, Inc.
  617 So. 2d 428· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-04-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the tort claims were barred by the statute of limitations and the breach of contract claim was not actionable because the employment contract was terminable at will.
• Sure-Snap Corp. v. State St. Bank & Tr. Co. & Bradford Nat'l Bank
  948 F.2d 869· 2d Cir.· 1991-11-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that lender liability claims, which could have been brought in a prior bankruptcy reorganization proceeding, are barred by res judicata from being litigated in a separate action.
• Guess v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.
  913 F.2d 463· 7th Cir.· 1990-09-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an employer's liability for coworker sexual harassment is based on a negligence standard, not strict liability, and that state law claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and breach of contract were barred by Indiana's workers' compensation exc
• Stikes v. Chevron USA, Inc.
  914 F.2d 1265· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an employee's state law claim for violation of the right to privacy is preempted by Section 301 of the LMRA if its resolution substantially depends on the interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement.
• Sharlene F. Elliott v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.
  910 F.2d 1224· 4th Cir.· 1990-08-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that even if purely emotional injuries are cognizable under FELA, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate unconscionable abuse or outrageous conduct, which is a prerequisite for such claims.
• Cook v. Growers
  911 F.2d 233· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Cook's claims for wrongful termination, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and emotional distress were preempted by federal law or state statute, but his religious discrimination claim was not. However, the court affirmed summary judgment becau
• Hanks v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  906 F.2d 341· 8th Cir.· 1990-06-18 ·cited 12×
  State law claims are not preempted by federal labor law if their resolution does not substantially depend on the interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement.
• Drinkwater v. Union Carbide Corp.
  904 F.2d 853· 3d Cir.· 1990-06-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while a consensual relationship between a supervisor and co-worker can contribute to a hostile work environment, the plaintiff's claim failed due to insufficient evidence of pervasive harassment. However, the court reversed summary judgment on the retaliation
• Harris v. Alumax Mill Prods., Inc.
  897 F.2d 400· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-26 ·cited 12×
  State law claims are preempted by Section 301 of the LMRA and are time-barred by the six-month statute of limitations applicable to such claims.
• Ne. Women's Ctr. v. McMONAGLE
  889 F.2d 466· 3d Cir.· 1989-11-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a proportionality rule does not apply to attorneys' fees awards under the civil RICO statute, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in calculating the fee award.
• Whitman v. Raley's Inc.
  886 F.2d 1177· 9th Cir.· 1989-10-03 ·cited 12×
  Remand orders based on a finding that federal law does not completely preempt state claims are barred from review by 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d).
• Miller v. Town OF Hull
  878 F.2d 523· 1st Cir.· 1989-06-21 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the jury's finding of liability and award of damages, holding that the defendants violated the plaintiffs' First Amendment rights by suspending them from their public office due to their voting positions on a controversial project.
• Blue Cross/Blue Shield OF Fla., Inc. v. Weiner
  543 So. 2d 794· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-04-26 ·cited 12×
  In this insurance coverage dispute, the Weiners sued Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Florida and Maryland after both companies denied coverage for two seriously ill sons. The court affirmed the jury's verdict against Maryland on fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress cl
• NEW Alaska Dev. Corp. v. Bernd C. Guetschow
  869 F.2d 1298· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a judge is absolutely immune for judicial acts within jurisdiction, and a court-appointed receiver is entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for acts within the scope of the appointing court's jurisdiction. Allegations of theft and slander by the receiver, howeve
• Matulin v. Vill. OF Lodi
  862 F.2d 609· 6th Cir.· 1988-12-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff's statements to a newspaper regarding employment discrimination were protected speech under the First Amendment, but she did not have a property interest in her probationary employment that required a due process hearing before termination.
• Hodes v. S.N.C. Achille Lauro ed Altri-Gestione Montonoave Achille Lauro in Amministrazione Straordinaria and Commissario of the Flotta Achille Lauro in Amministrazione Straordinaria and Chandris (Italy)
  858 F.2d 905· 3d Cir.· 1988-09-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a foreign forum selection clause in a cruise ticket was reasonably communicated and enforceable, reversing the lower court's decision.
• Kersh v. Derozier
  851 F.2d 1509· 5th Cir.· 1988-08-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a pro se litigant's ignorance of service rules does not constitute 'good cause' for untimely service, and that a defendant waives the defense of insufficient service of process if not raised in their first responsive pleading. The court also found a pretrial s
• Salgado v. Atl. Richfield Co.
  823 F.2d 1322· 9th Cir.· 1987-07-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the one-year time limit for filing a civil action under FEHA is a statute of limitations subject to equitable tolling, and that common law claims are not necessarily preempted by FEHA if they allege actions separate from age discrimination.
• Barnier v. Szentmiklosi
  810 F.2d 594· 6th Cir.· 1987-02-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the adequacy of state remedies can limit § 1983 claims, liberty and property interests should not be removed from § 1983's protection at the outset of analysis.
• Palermo v. Dewayne Rorex
  806 F.2d 1266· 5th Cir.· 1987-01-05 ·cited 12×
  Federal employees are entitled to absolute immunity for common law torts committed within the scope of their employment, and a Bivens remedy is not available when Congress has provided an alternative administrative remedy.
• Harllel B. Jones v. Shankland
  800 F.2d 77· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellant's civil rights claims were time-barred by the applicable one-year statute of limitations and that county prosecutors were absolutely immune from suit.
• Gaut v. Sunn
  792 F.2d 874· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that allegations of severe beatings and threats to deter legal action, taken as true, state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Earley R. Woodmore v. Git-N-Go
  790 F.2d 1497· 10th Cir.· 1986-05-20 ·cited 12×
  A trial court must explain why dismissal is the appropriate sanction when a case is dismissed, especially if refiling is barred by the statute of limitations.
• Wierstak v. Heffernan
  789 F.2d 968· 1st Cir.· 1986-05-02 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the district court did not err in excluding prior convictions, admitting expert testimony, denying motions for directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or in its findings on municipal liability.
• The Rev. O. Lloyd Hutchison v. The Rev. James S. Thomas
  789 F.2d 392· 6th Cir.· 1986-04-28 ·cited 12×
  The First Amendment prohibits civil courts from intervening in the internal ecclesiastical decisions of hierarchical religious organizations regarding matters of faith, discipline, and governance.
• Shaare Tefila Congregation v. Cobb
  785 F.2d 523· 4th Cir.· 1986-03-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the cited federal statutes do not provide a basis for suit in the circumstances presented.
• Williams v. The City OF Boston
  784 F.2d 430· 1st Cir.· 1986-02-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that allegations of simple negligence by state officials do not state a claim for deprivation of liberty without due process of law under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and claims based on a cover-up also failed to state a claim.
• Flynn v. Lafayette Ronald Hubbard
  782 F.2d 1084· 1st Cir.· 1986-02-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that appellants failed to demonstrate a direct, substantial, legally protectible interest that would be impaired by the disposition of the suit, thus they were not entitled to intervene as of right.
• Seredinski v. Clifton Precision Prods. Co.
  776 F.2d 56· 3d Cir.· 1985-10-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff's retaliation claim under Title VII should not have been dismissed as untimely due to the EEOC's failure to follow its own regulations regarding deferral to state agencies, and that equitable tolling was warranted.
• Easton v. The City OF Boulder
  776 F.2d 1441· 10th Cir.· 1985-10-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that even if an arrest warrant affidavit contains negligent misrepresentations or omissions, it does not automatically invalidate the warrant if probable cause still exists based on the information presented. The court affirmed the directed verdict for the officers
• Nell Aspero v. Shearson Am. Express, Inc.
  768 F.2d 106· 6th Cir.· 1985-07-17 ·cited 12×
  A controversy arising out of a registered broker's employment or termination of employment, even if involving tortious acts occurring after the contract's termination, is subject to arbitration under NYSE Rule 347 if its resolution requires evaluating the party's performance as a
• Remola Boykin v. The Dist. of Columbia
  689 F.2d 1092· D.C. Cir.· 1982-09-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that municipalities cannot be held liable under a respondeat superior theory for constitutional torts committed by their employees in Bivens-type actions, and that claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986 are not applicable to the District of Columbia in this
• Kohn v. United States
  680 F.2d 922· 2d Cir.· 1982-06-04 ·cited 12×
  The Feres doctrine bars claims by servicemen for injuries incident to military service, but does not bar claims for independent, post-service negligent acts by the military against parents of a deceased serviceman.
• Hutchinson v. Proxmire
  579 F.2d 1027· 7th Cir.· 1978-06-30 ·cited 12×
  Statements made in television, radio interviews, and follow-up phone calls to administrative agencies are not protected by absolute Speech or Debate immunity, but the plaintiff, as a public figure, failed to show actual malice required for a First Amendment claim.
• Karin Hanke v. Global van Lines
  533 F.2d 396· 8th Cir.· 1976-04-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a jury could find a moving company's repeated misrepresentations about delivery times, causing severe emotional distress, to be outrageous conduct, thus reversing summary judgment.
• World Ins. Co. v. Wright
  308 So. 2d 612· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-02-14 ·cited 12×
  A disability insurer appeals a jury verdict awarding the insured $863.29 for policy benefits and $40,000 in compensatory damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The appellate court affirms, finding the evidence supported the jury's findings that the insurer's ba
• Margarett Fields v. The Devereux Found., Inc.
  244 So. 3d 1193· Fla. 2d DCA· 2018-05-04 ·cited 11×
  An employer moving for summary judgment on vicarious liability for an employee's intentional tort must present affidavits or other summary judgment evidence demonstrating the nonexistence of material facts; a bare assertion without supporting evidence is insufficient to shift the
• W.D. v. Archdiocese OF Miami, Inc.
  197 So. 3d 584· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-06-01 ·cited 11×
  A plaintiff who alleged childhood sexual abuse by priests at a Catholic school sought to overcome a statute of limitations bar by invoking the delayed discovery doctrine, equitable estoppel, and statutory exceptions. The Fourth District affirmed dismissal, holding that the delaye
• Noveshen v. Bridgewater Assocs., LP
  S.D. Fla.· 2014-09-22 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state claims for trademark invalidity based on genericness and fraud, and most state law claims, but granted leave to amend some claims and allowed the unjust enrichment claim to proceed.
• Prof'l Roofing & Sales, Inc. v. Flemmings
  138 So. 3d 524· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-04-30 ·cited 11×
  Professional Roofing and Jose Alvarez sought immunity from civil liability under Florida's Stand Your Ground Law after a criminal court dismissed aggravated battery charges against Alvarez for striking a former employee with a baseball bat. The court held that while res judicata
• Alderwoods Grp., Inc. v. Reyvis Garcia
  682 F.3d 958· 11th Cir.· 2012-05-30 ·cited 11×
  A bankruptcy court in one federal district lacks jurisdiction to determine whether a debt was discharged in a bankruptcy case litigated in another federal district. The Debtors filed a complaint in the Florida Bankruptcy Court seeking a declaration that tort claims filed by the C
• Dep't OF Agric. v. Bryant Middleton
  24 So. 3d 624· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-12-02 ·cited 11×
  In this class action lawsuit by former juvenile residents of Florida reform schools against state agencies and individual defendants, the court reversed the trial court's denial of a motion to transfer venue, holding that state agencies are entitled to the absolute home venue pri
• Sterling v. Provident Life & Acc. Ins. Co.
  519 F. Supp. 2d 1195· M.D. Fla.· 2007-06-19 ·cited 11×
  The court denied the motion to transfer venue, finding that the plaintiff's choice of forum should not be disturbed as the balance of convenience did not strongly favor transfer. The court also addressed the standard for a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
• Rivers v. Grimsley OIL Co., Inc.
  842 So. 2d 975· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-04-11 ·cited 11×
  Kathleen Rivers appealed a summary judgment dismissing her negligent infliction of emotional distress claim against her employer after she was robbed at a convenience store. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that Florida's impact rule bars recovery for psycho
• Scarfo v. Ginsberg
  817 So. 2d 919· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-05-08 ·cited 11×
  Plaintiff filed employment discrimination claims in federal court under Title VII, joined with state tort claims. After the federal claim was dismissed on summary judgment, she refiled her state law claims in Florida state court within a month. The court reversed the dismissal of
• Kingston Square Tenants Ass'n v. Tuskegee Gardens, Ltd.
  792 F. Supp. 1566· S.D. Fla.· 1992-05-26 ·cited 11×
  The court held that tenants cannot bring an implied cause of action under federal housing statutes for monetary damages and that tort claims for economic losses arising from a contract breach are barred by the economic loss rule.
• Renay Hunter v. The Dist. OF Columbia
  943 F.2d 69· D.C. Cir.· 1991-08-30 ·cited 11×
  The court held that a plaintiff's § 1983 claim against an individual officer for excessive force, occurring before Graham v. Connor, must meet a heightened pleading standard and be judged against the "clearly established" law at the time, which in this circuit was the Norris stan
• ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Vigilant Ins. Co.
  919 F.2d 235· 4th Cir.· 1990-11-21 ·cited 11×
  An insurer that breaches its duty to defend its insured is estopped from later arguing that the underlying events occurred outside its policy period and must contribute to settlements and defense costs.
• Boyer v. Snap-On Tools Corp.
  913 F.2d 108· 3d Cir.· 1990-09-05 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the motion to remand because it improperly considered the merits of the release defense, which was common to both diverse and non-diverse defendants, in determining fraudulent joinder.