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

• Kraeer Funeral Homes, Inc. v. Noble
  521 So. 2d 324· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-03-09 ·cited 5×
  This case concerns a lawsuit against a funeral home for mishandling the remains of a decedent. A jury awarded the decedent's widow $85,000 in compensatory damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The court affirmed the compensatory damages award and reversed the
• Silvester v. Am. Broad. Cos., Inc.
  650 F. Supp. 766· S.D. Fla.· 1986-12-30 ·cited 5×
  The court held that certain statements in the broadcast were capable of a defamatory interpretation, but that the plaintiffs were limited public figures who would need to prove actual malice.
• Reverend Jerry Falwell v. Flynt
  805 F.2d 484· 4th Cir.· 1986-11-04 ·cited 5×
  The court, in a dissenting opinion from the denial of rehearing en banc, argues that political figures should not be able to recover damages for emotional distress caused by speech that does not contain a false statement of fact and does not inflict reputational harm. The First A
• Davis v. Travelers Indem. Co. OF Am.
  800 F.2d 1050· 11th Cir.· 1986-09-30 ·cited 5×
  The court held that asserting a legal defense, even if ultimately unsuccessful, does not constitute a violation of Florida's Unfair Insurance Trade Practices Act, and the alleged conduct did not rise to the level of intentional infliction of emotional distress.
• Simonin v. Sims
  456 So. 2d 499· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-08-29 ·cited 5×
  Simonin appeals the dismissal of his complaint against Lenning's estate representatives for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, false imprisonment, emotional distress, and conversion arising from a criminal grand theft charge that was later nolle prossed. The court reversed
• Stetz v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading
  368 So. 2d 912· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-03-06 ·cited 5×
  The Stetzes appealed a summary judgment order denying punitive damages in their breach of contract action against an insurer. The Florida appellate court affirmed, holding that absent a willful and independent tort separate from the breach of contract itself, punitive damages are
• Buchanan v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  400 So. 3d 684· Fla. 3d DCA· 2024-09-30 ·cited 4×
  George Buchanan sought damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress after a police officer shot and killed his pet dog, Sweetie. The court affirmed the trial court's dismissal, holding that Buchanan failed to state an IIED claim because he was not present when the dog
• Haynes v. Arman
  192 So. 3d 546· Fla. 5th DCA· 2016-05-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted on punitive damages, fraud in the inducement, and non-economic damages, as these issues presented genuine questions of material fact for the jury. The court affirmed the injunction regarding easements but reversed associ
• Fernandez v. Barry Univ., Inc.
  973 So. 2d 1240· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-01-30 ·cited 4×
  The Fernandezes appealed the trial court's dismissal with prejudice of their amended complaint for failure to comply with pleading rules. The appellate court reversed, holding that pro se litigants must be given opportunities to amend before dismissal with prejudice is imposed, a
• Urquhart v. Helmich
  947 So. 2d 539· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-12-27 ·cited 4×
  A pediatrician reported a skull fracture observed on CT scan to child abuse authorities, suspecting possible abuse despite the parents' explanation that forceps trauma during birth caused it. The appellate court affirmed summary judgment for the doctor, holding that physicians wh
• Ferris v. S. Fla. Stadium Corp.
  926 So. 2d 399· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-02-01 ·cited 4×
  Attorney Ferris and his law firm appealed a judgment on the pleadings dismissing their tortious interference claim against South Florida Stadium Corporation and Huizenga Holdings. The court affirmed, holding that tortious interference with an at-will attorney-client relationship
• Bazile v. Lucent Techs.
  403 F. Supp. 2d 1174· S.D. Fla.· 2005-11-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to meet the criteria for disability pension benefits and that his claim of malicious termination was barred by res judicata.
• Mega Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Tordion
  399 F. Supp. 2d 1366· S.D. Fla.· 2005-11-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendants' motion to dismiss based on abstention should be denied because the presence of coercive relief, specifically rescission, triggers the stricter Colorado River abstention standard, which was not met.
• Wagner v. Garland Strickland
  908 So. 2d 549· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-08-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's dismissal order was improper because the appellant's claims were not compulsory counterclaims, did not constitute impermissible splitting of a cause of action, and each count stated a valid cause of action.
• Jackson v. Worldwide Flight Servs., Inc.
  960 So. 2d 3· Fla. 3d DCA· 2005-03-30 ·cited 4×
  A plaintiff may cure a prematurely filed discrimination complaint under the Florida Civil Rights Act by obtaining a right-to-sue letter from the Commission and re-filing the action within the applicable statute of limitations, provided the plaintiff did not impede the Commission'
• Protegrity Servs., Inc. v. Brehm
  901 So. 2d 150· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-02-11 ·cited 4×
  Protegrity Services, a workers' compensation third-party administrator, appeals the denial of its motion to dismiss based on workers' compensation immunity. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that Protegrity enjoys the same immunity as employers and insu
• Nicor Int'l Corp. v. El Paso Corp.
  318 F. Supp. 2d 1160· S.D. Fla.· 2004-05-25 ·cited 4×·via Outrageous Conduct Causing Severe Emotional Distress
  The court denied plaintiffs' motions, affirming its prior grant of summary judgment for defendants. It held that state law governs the recognition of foreign judgments, and under both Florida and Texas law, the Dominican Republic's sentence was not entitled to recognition due to
• Sher v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
  848 So. 2d 1246· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-07-09 ·cited 4×
  Tenants sued their home's mortgage company and real estate company after personal property was removed from a foreclosed home without notice. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants and awarded attorney's fees, but the appellate court reversed the fee awards,
• Solomon v. Well Care HMO, Inc.
  822 So. 2d 543· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-07-24 ·cited 4×
  The Solomons sued their HMO, Well Care, for breach of contract, fraud, and other claims arising from Well Care's withdrawal of authorization for Gladys Solomon's hysterectomy surgery after initially approving it. The trial court dismissed the complaint as medical malpractice requ
• Carroll v. Neumann
  204 F. Supp. 2d 1344· S.D. Fla.· 2002-04-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant is entitled to summary judgment on all counts because the plaintiff failed to establish genuine issues of material fact regarding his claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress, First Amendment violation, age discrimination, disabilit
• Littell v. United States
  191 F. Supp. 2d 1338· M.D. Fla.· 2002-03-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that claims for malicious prosecution and abuse of process against the United States are barred by the discretionary function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act, as the investigative and prosecutorial decisions involved were discretionary and grounded in publ
• Est. of Cabello v. Fernandez-Larios
  157 F. Supp. 2d 1345· S.D. Fla.· 2001-08-10 ·cited 4×
  The Estate of Winston Cabello and family members sued Armando Fernandez-Larios under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA), and international law for the October 17, 1973 extrajudicial killing and torture of Winston Cabello during Chile's military
• Gibbs v. Republic Tobacco, L.P.
  119 F. Supp. 2d 1288· M.D. Fla.· 2000-09-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that claims of two plaintiffs were barred by res judicata, and the remaining plaintiff's claims failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• Gillis v. Sports Auth., Inc.
  123 F. Supp. 2d 611· S.D. Fla.· 2000-04-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged a continuing violation for his ADA claim, but failed to properly allege exhaustion of administrative remedies under the FCRA and failed to state claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent hiring, su
• Dolin v. West
  22 F. Supp. 2d 1343· M.D. Fla.· 1998-09-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that defendants are entitled to immunity and that the plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted for both federal and state law causes of action.
• Kaufman v. Checkers Drive-In Rests., Inc.
  122 F.3d 892· 11th Cir.· 1997-08-29 ·cited 4×
  Russell Kaufman sued Checkers Drive-In Restaurants for employment discrimination and harassment under federal and state law. The district court declined supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims, finding they substantially predominated over the federal claims. The Eleve
• Richard Mulholland & Assocs. v. Polverari
  698 So. 2d 1269· Fla. 2d DCA· 1997-08-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an order compelling production of attorney representation agreements with other clients was an abuse of discretion.
• The Est. of A.P. Stuckey, Sr. v. Rupert B. Brown and Lettie Nell Brown
  688 So. 2d 438· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-02-28 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court held that the jury award of damages was neither duplicative nor against the manifest weight of the evidence, and alleged jury misconduct was not substantial enough to warrant a new trial.
• Hager v. Venice Hosp., Inc.
  944 F. Supp. 1530· M.D. Fla.· 1996-10-30 ·cited 4×
  The court granted summary judgment for most claims, finding no genuine issue of material fact, but denied summary judgment on one count of tortious interference with business relationships due to factual disputes.
• Caraballo v. S. Stevedoring, Inc.
  932 F. Supp. 1462· S.D. Fla.· 1996-07-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that claims for punitive damages under the ADEA, ADA, and FCRA do not survive the death of the plaintiff, and common law claims are dismissed without prejudice for lack of supplemental jurisdiction.
• Hayduk v. United Parcel Serv., Inc.
  930 F. Supp. 584· S.D. Fla.· 1996-04-25 ·cited 4×
  A third-party defendant may remove a case under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(c) if the third-party complaint states a separate and independent claim that could have been brought in federal court alone, and the court may permit amendment of the removal notice to add § 1441(c) as a basis.
• Ronda C. Weinstock, Ph.D. v. Groth
  659 So. 2d 713· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-09-01 ·cited 4×
  Dr. Weinstock sought certiorari review of a trial court discovery order, challenging requests for information about her psychotherapy and mental health treatment. The appellate court granted certiorari in part, quashing the order compelling disclosure of her psychotherapist's nam
• Harper Cos., Inc. v. Scott
  656 So. 2d 627· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-07-05 ·cited 4×
  Harper Companies appealed the dismissal of their second amended complaint against attorneys and a judgment creditor who allegedly orchestrated a wrongful seizure of consignment merchandise. The Fourth District reversed in part, holding that while the intentional infliction of emo
• Nadeau v. Costley
  634 So. 2d 649· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-01-12 ·cited 4×
  Carol Nadeau appeals a summary judgment dismissing her claims against cruise line Carnival and Captain Los arising from a sexual assault by crew member Costley in her cabin. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed as to Carnival on breach of contract and vicarious liability
• Nazon v. Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc.
  832 F. Supp. 1540· S.D. Fla.· 1993-09-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's statutory and state law claims are subject to arbitration under the parties' agreement and industry rules, and that the plaintiff must initiate the arbitration proceedings.
• Hyatt Legal Servs. v. Ruppitz
  620 So. 2d 1134· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-07-02 ·cited 4×
  Hyatt Legal Services appealed a judgment awarding damages to Robert Ruppitz based on Ruppitz's assignment of attorney Albert Marshall's claim for breach of Hyatt's malpractice protection agreement. The court affirmed, holding that Hyatt's informal self-insurance arrangement creat
• Chance v. Rice Univ. & Alan Grob
  984 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1993-02-25 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment for Rice University and the directed verdict for Dr. Grob, finding no error in the application of legal standards or the sufficiency of evidence.
• Nenh Phetosomphone v. Allison Reed Grp., Inc.
  984 F.2d 4· 1st Cir.· 1993-01-20 ·cited 4×
  The court should reconsider the district court's award of attorney's fees, as it improperly depreciated the value of the Civil Rights Act by focusing on limited monetary recovery.
• Johnson v. Powell F. Carter
  983 F.2d 1316· 4th Cir.· 1993-01-15 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge argues that the Attorney General's certification of scope of employment for substitution purposes is judicially reviewable, and that the military officer in this case acted outside the scope of his employment.
• Albertson's, Inc. v. Carrigan
  982 F.2d 1478· 10th Cir.· 1993-01-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a state law claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress or outrageous conduct is not preempted by § 301 of the LMRA if it can be resolved without interpreting the collective bargaining agreement.
• Groth v. Ronda C. Weinstock, Ph.D.
  610 So. 2d 477· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-11-06 ·cited 4×
  Suzanne Groth appealed the dismissal of her negligence and emotional distress action against psychologist Dr. Ronda Weinstock, who was allegedly involved in an affair with Groth's husband while providing therapy. The court reversed the dismissal, holding that psychologists are no
• Lewis v. Seventh DAY Adventists Lake Region Conference
  978 F.2d 940· 6th Cir.· 1992-11-04 ·cited 4×
  The First Amendment bars civil courts from intervening in employment disputes between a church and its clergy, requiring deference to the decisions of the highest church judicatory.
• Brown v. Walt Disney World Co.
  805 F. Supp. 1554· M.D. Fla.· 1992-11-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while race was a motivating factor in employment decisions, the employer would have made the same termination decision based on performance issues alone.
• Mock v. T.G. & Y. Stores Co.
  971 F.2d 522· 10th Cir.· 1992-07-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that appeals from consent judgments entered under Rule 68 are barred, and that state law claims arising from an investigation are preempted by the LMRA if their resolution depends on the collective bargaining agreement.
• Flavio O. Ramirez v. Allright Parking EL Paso, Inc.
  970 F.2d 1372· 5th Cir.· 1992-07-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support a jury verdict for intentional infliction of emotional distress, but affirmed the jury's verdict for age discrimination under the ADEA.
• Marilee S. Elliott v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
  967 F.2d 1258· 8th Cir.· 1992-06-30 ·cited 4×
• Doe v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs
  783 F. Supp. 1379· S.D. Fla.· 1992-01-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Civil Rights Act of 1991 does not apply retroactively to the plaintiff's claims, and therefore, the motion to amend the complaint to add claims under the 1991 Act is denied in part.
• Milne Emps. Ass'n v. SUN Carriers, Inc.
  960 F.2d 1401· 9th Cir.· 1991-11-20 ·cited 4×
  State law claims are preempted by Section 301 of the LMRA if their resolution requires interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement. Nonsignatories to a CBA have standing to remove cases based on Section 301 preemption.
• Cochrane v. Quattrocchi
  949 F.2d 11· 1st Cir.· 1991-11-15 ·cited 4×
  A prison visitor's consent to a strip search is not legally cognizable if conditioned on the choice between the search and foregoing visitation, and the reasonableness of such a search is a question of fact for the jury.
• Duvall v. THE Ritz Carlton Hotel Co.
  946 F.2d 418· 5th Cir.· 1991-11-07 ·cited 4×
  California Civil Code sections limiting innkeeper liability to $500 for lost property, absent a written agreement for greater liability, apply to all claims, including those based on negligence or post-theft oral promises.