MILLIE SKELTON, APPELLANT,
v.
RAFAEL MUNEZ, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed a jury verdict for intentional infliction of mental distress, invasion of privacy, breach of contract, and conversion, finding the plaintiff failed to establish prima facie cases for the tort claims and the damages award for contract and conversion claims far exceeded compensable damages.
A plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of intentional infliction of mental distress and invasion of privacy to proceed, and damages awards must be supported by evidence of actual compensable damages.
[1] A plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of intentional infliction of mental distress and invasion of privacy to survive summary judgment or support a jury verdict.
[2] Damages awards must be supported by evidence of actual compensable damages and cannot substantially exceed the damages proven at trial.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRafael Munez sued Millie Skelton for intentional infliction of mental distress, invasion of privacy, breach of contract, and conversion. A jury return…
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 Invasion Of Privacy cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a final judgment entered upon a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff in an action sounding in intentional infliction of mental distress, invasion of privacy, breach of contract and conversion. The sole point on appeal is that the trial court erred in denying the defendant Millie Skelton’s motion for new trial. We entirely agree because (1) on this record, the plaintiff Rafael Munez failed to establish a pri-ma facie case of intentional infliction of mental distress and invasion of privacy, see Cason v. Baskin, 159 Fla. 31, 30 So. 2d 635 (1947); Trueba v. Pershing Indus., 374 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 383 So. 2d 1204 (Fla.1980); Gellert v. Eastern Air Lines, 370 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) and cases collected, cert. denied, 381 So. 2d 766 (Fla.1980), and (2) the damages awarded for conversion and breach of contract [$29,000] far exceed the only compensable damages established below [$3,047.74], the jury having declined to award any punitive damages in the case. See Bartholf v. Baker, 71 So. 2d 480, 484-85 (Fla.1954); Williams v. Cannon, 126 Fla. 441, 43-44, 171 So. 308 (1936); City of Miami v. Graham, 311 So. 2d 697, 699 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), cert. denied, 330 So. 2d 17 (Fla.1976).
The final judgment under review is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to order a new trial.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bartholf v. Baker, 71 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1954)
- Zelma Cason v. Baskin, 159 Fla. 31 (Fla. 1947)
- Gellert v. E. AIR Lines, Inc., 370 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- The City OF Miami v. Raleigh L. Graham, 311 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Woods v. State, 374 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Homero Trueba v. Pershing Indus., Inc., 374 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Williams v. Cannon, 126 Fla. 441 (Fla. 1936)