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

• Stephens v. Meininger (In Re Credit Life Corp.)
  184 B.R. 839· M.D. Fla.· 1995-08-01 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court abused its discretion by denying the motion to annul the automatic stay, and that it was appropriate to lift the stay to allow the state court proceedings to determine ownership of the life insurance policy.
• Davis v. Grusemeyer
  996 F.2d 617· 3d Cir.· 1993-06-08 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff's RICO claims were time-barred and that state prosecutors were absolutely immune from the plaintiff's malicious prosecution claims.
• Jackson v. Kimel
  992 F.2d 1318· 4th Cir.· 1993-04-30 ·cited 1×
  The court held that a state-law tort claim against a fellow employee, even if removed, is not preempted by § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act if the employee is not a signatory to the collective bargaining agreement.
• Candelore v. Clark Cnty. Sanitation Dist.
  975 F.2d 588· 9th Cir.· 1992-09-14 ·cited 1×
  The court affirmed the decision because the plaintiff failed to establish a factual predicate for her alleged discrimination claim.
• Goodwin v. Metts
  973 F.2d 378· 4th Cir.· 1992-08-28 ·cited 1×
  The court affirmed the district court's reduction of attorney fees, finding that unsuccessful claims unrelated to the successful malicious prosecution claims justified disallowance, and that duplication of effort due to overstaffing was a valid reason for reduction. The court als
• Sfeir v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y OF the United States
  595 So. 2d 971· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-02-21 ·cited 1×
  In a malicious prosecution suit, the appellate court reversed the summary judgment dismissing Sfeir's claims against Equitable Life, holding that a factual issue exists regarding whether Equitable's voluntary dismissal of its underlying suit constituted a favorable termination to
• McCray v. Holt
  777 F. Supp. 945· S.D. Fla.· 1991-10-28 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the allegations in the Second Amended Complaint were sufficient to state a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress and that supplemental jurisdiction existed for the loss of consortium claims under the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990
• Adkins v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  946 F.2d 1201· 6th Cir.· 1991-10-15 ·cited 1×
  Claims arising from or substantially dependent on the interpretation of collective bargaining agreements are preempted by federal labor law and barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
• Larez v. City OF LOS Angeles
  946 F.2d 630· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-27 ·cited 1×
  The court affirmed the denial of a new trial for the six officers but reversed and remanded for a new trial against Chief Gates and the City due to the erroneous admission of hearsay evidence.
• McKenzie v. Doctors' Hosp. of Hollywood, Inc.
  765 F. Supp. 1504· S.D. Fla.· 1991-06-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim for federal constitutional violations and dismissed the pendant state law claims.
• Sica v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of US
  756 F. Supp. 539· S.D. Fla.· 1990-12-13 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff was an independent contractor, not an employee under ERISA, and therefore his state law claims were not preempted.
• The Kan. Bankers Sur. Co. v. Lynass
  920 F.2d 546· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-05 ·cited 1×
  An insurer cannot insist on controlling the defense of its insured after issuing a reservation of rights without the insured's consent, as this constitutes bad faith.
• Baker v. Joseph Fitzgerald, M.D.
  573 So. 2d 873· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-12-04 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the appellant's complaint did not allege sufficient physical injuries for negligent infliction of emotional distress and did not state a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
• Paul v. Brumby
  548 So. 2d 286· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-09-05 ·cited 1×
• Salazar v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co.
  715 F. Supp. 351· S.D. Fla.· 1989-05-30 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff's age discrimination claim was time-barred because she failed to file an administrative charge with the EEOC within the required 300-day period.
• Thompson v. Shelter Mut. Ins.
  875 F.2d 1460· 10th Cir.· 1989-05-22 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to submit the bad faith claim to the jury and support the jury's finding, and that attorney fees are compensable for bad faith claims under the statute, but ordered a remittitur for an excessive personal property award.
• Von Stein v. Brescher
  696 F. Supp. 606· S.D. Fla.· 1988-10-05 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because a reasonable officer would have known that there was no probable cause to arrest the plaintiff, given his cooperation and lack of requisite knowledge regarding the illegal activities.
• Hart v. United States
  681 F. Supp. 1518· N.D. Fla.· 1988-01-12 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the government's conduct, taken as a whole, was outrageous as a matter of law, entitling the plaintiff Anne M. Hart to summary judgment on liability.
• Joseph P. Bornstein, Ltd. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. OF Pittsburgh, PA
  828 F.2d 242· 4th Cir.· 1987-09-14 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the insurance policy's provision for defending "any proceeding or suit brought by any government regulatory agency seeking nonpecuniary relief" was ambiguous and, under Virginia law, must be construed in favor of the insured, obligating the insurer to defend t
• Tumulty v. Aetna Life Ins.
  659 F. Supp. 70· S.D. Fla.· 1987-03-03 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' state law claims were preempted by ERISA because the employer's medical plan was self-funded and self-insured, and that the claims were also barred for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Emory Conner v. Sticher
  801 F.2d 1266· 11th Cir.· 1986-10-14 ·cited 1×
  The dissenting judge holds that psychological harassment by police constitutes an abuse of power and implicates a constitutionally protected interest.
• NN Invs. Life Ins. Co. v. The Prof'l Grp., Inc.
  468 So. 2d 532· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-05-14 ·cited 1×
  NN Investors Life Insurance Company appeals a jury verdict awarding damages to The Professional Group, Inc. for the tort of "economic duress." The court holds that economic duress is not a recognized tort in Florida or most jurisdictions, and reverses the judgment.
• Finn v. Davis
  602 F. Supp. 801· S.D. Fla.· 1985-02-19 ·cited 1×
  The court held that it would not exercise pendent jurisdiction over state law claims because they predominated the federal claims and raised the likelihood of jury confusion, and that one federal claim for churning was not pled with sufficient particularity under Rule 9(b).
• Ferrara v. Mills
  596 F. Supp. 1069· S.D. Fla.· 1984-11-14 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff's speech, concerning internal school policies and personal grievances, did not constitute a matter of public concern and therefore was not protected by the First Amendment.
• Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. McCARSON
  429 So. 2d 1287· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-04-06 ·cited 1×
  Metropolitan Life Insurance Company appealed a wrongful death judgment arising from its alleged wrongful termination of home nursing care benefits for an Alzheimer's patient. The Fourth District affirmed, holding that sufficient evidence supported liability under an intentional i
• Geary v. Starr
  418 So. 2d 1135· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-08-18 ·cited 1×
  In this vicarious liability case, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed part of a jury verdict awarding punitive damages against an employer, holding that under respondeat superior doctrine, an employer can only be held vicariously liable for punitive damages if there is s
• Mims v. Mims
  305 So. 2d 787· Fla. 4th DCA· 1974-10-31 ·cited 1×
  A spouse cannot sue the other for intentional infliction of emotional distress based on marital misconduct occurring during the marriage.
• Doe v. Doe
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-09-30
  A plaintiff cannot obtain a protective order staying his deposition based on Fifth Amendment concerns while simultaneously deposing the defendant and proceeding with his civil lawsuit, as this impermissibly uses the Fifth Amendment as both a sword and shield.
• Kohn v. Air Experts Today
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2026-09-18
  A trial court must apply the common law standard for new trials under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530 when considering a motion for new trial on punitive damages, not the remittitur statute standard. The case was remanded for the trial court to reconsider the motion under t
• Doe v. Carnival Corp.
  11th Cir.· 2026-08-25
  The FBI investigator's factual conclusion that the sexual encounter was consensual is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8) as a public record exception to hearsay because the opposing party failed to meet her burden of demonstrating lack of trustworthiness. This concl
• Est. of Lane Caviness v. Atlas Air, Inc.
  11th Cir.· 2026-07-10
  The district court properly lacked personal jurisdiction over Flight Services International because the company, incorporated and headquartered in Texas, had insufficient contacts with Florida; employees' brief attendance at training sessions in Miami did not establish general ju
• Ahmed Shaikh v. Fox News Network, LLC
  11th Cir.· 2026-06-04
  Federal courts may dismiss a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the frivolous claim exception where allegations are wholly insubstantial and frivolous with no plausible foundation, even when a factual attack on jurisdiction is presented. Shaikh's allegations that
• Nichols v. French
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2026-05-20
  A trial court lacks discretion to deny a timely motion for trial de novo in nonbinding arbitration based on failure to comply with an additional procedural requirement imposed by case management order when the statute and rule provide that an arbitration decision becomes final on
• Doe v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n of the Suncoast, Inc.
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2026-05-15
  The trial court abused its discretion by dismissing with prejudice the parents' loss of filial consortium and breach of contract claims, as these claims had not been previously amended and dismissal would not prejudice the defendants or be futile. The trial court properly dismiss
• Mrs. S. Gold v. RK Assocs. #2, Inc.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-04-10
  An appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review a trial court's order denying a motion for rehearing when that rehearing motion is untimely filed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530(b) and constitutes a prohibited successive motion for rehearing.
• Lopez v. Kendall Healthcare Grp., Ltd.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-03-04
  Jose Fabian Lopez appeals summary judgments entered in favor of Kendall Healthcare Group and EMT Alex Marcovich following his son's death at the hospital after a motorcycle accident. The court affirmed both judgments, holding that neither the Hospital's privacy officer's disclosu
• Lopez v. Kendall Healthcare Grp., Ltd.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-03-04
  Jose Fabian Lopez appealed summary judgments granted in favor of Kendall Healthcare Group and EMT Alex Marcovich following his son's death after a motorcycle accident. Lopez claimed intentional infliction of emotional distress and invasion of privacy based on Marcovich's unauthor
• Chenmou WU v. [Unknown]
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2026-02-26
  Chenmou Wu sued his former girlfriend Shuai Wang and her parents for rent, transportation costs, lost wages, and emotional distress arising from their occupancy of his Delaware residence following their separation. The court granted summary judgment for defendants, finding Wu's c
• Frederic P. McCann v. CP Direct LLC
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2026-02-12
  Frederic McCann, former CFO of CP Direct LLC, sued for wrongful termination and breach of his employment agreement, bringing five counts including breach of contract, implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, tortious interference, and intentional infl
• DeMaio v. Royal Caribbean Grp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-02-10
  The court held that a pro se litigant cannot represent others, and the second amended complaint was dismissed as a shotgun pleading, but the plaintiff was granted leave to amend.
• Henry v. Iannone
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-01-28
  The court accepted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting summary judgment for the defendants because they had arguable probable cause for the arrest, entitling them to qualified immunity and sovereign immunity.
• Ivy Beth Handsman and Michael Micalizzi v. Prayz
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-01-21
  The court held that the amended complaint must be dismissed without prejudice for failure to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim, but granted plaintiffs leave to amend.
• Duarte v. Trooper Javier Rivera and Florida Highway Patrol
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-16
  The court granted the motions to dismiss, finding that the Florida Highway Patrol is immune from suit in federal court under the Eleventh Amendment and that Trooper Rivera is entitled to qualified immunity on the federal claims.
• Vazquez v. Ramirez
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-12
  The court held that the defendants' default could be set aside for good cause, as their default was not willful, setting it aside would not prejudice the plaintiff, and they intended to assert meritorious defenses.
• Hayes v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-09
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act because he did not allege facts demonstrating a disability or that any adverse action was based on such a disability. The court granted leave to amend.
• Meda Chingarev v. Rambosk
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-31
  The court held that a plaintiff cannot succeed on a First Amendment retaliatory arrest claim if probable cause existed for the arrest, and that the alleged excessive force during an arrest, while potentially a constitutional violation, does not meet the high standard for intentio
• Dep't of Corr. v. Beebe
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2025-12-31
  The Department of Corrections is entitled to sovereign immunity because the alleged conduct of correctional officers in deliberately placing an inmate in a cell to facilitate his rape constitutes action outside the scope of employment, which is not covered by the statutory waiver
• Evans v. Helton
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-19
  The court recommended dismissal of the plaintiff's second amended complaint for failing to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction and for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
• Hutcheson v. U.S. Dep't of Veteran Affairs
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-12
  The court held that the plaintiffs' federal employment claims must be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and the state law claims are dismissed for lack of supplemental jurisdiction.
• L.M. v. Carnival Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-12-08
  The court held that disclosing a crewmember's statement to the FBI during a criminal investigation does not waive work-product privilege, and a plaintiff cannot record a compulsory medical examination.