ALF J. AANONSEN
v.
MICHAEL A. SUAREZ, ETC.,
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.
The appellate court reversed a punitive damages award, holding that such damages are generally not recoverable for a breach of contract claim unless there is proof of a separate, independent tort and non-duplicative damages.
No, punitive damages are generally not recoverable for a breach of contract absent proof of a separate and independent tort and non-duplicative damages grounded in tort.
[1] Damages arising out of a breach of contract are generally limited to the pecuniary loss sustained or those which are the natural and proximate result of the breach, absen…
[2] A plaintiff may not recover damages for fraud that duplicate damages awarded for breach of contract.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Reaffirming the principle that, absent proof of a separate and independent tort, damages arising out of breach of contract are generally limited to the pecuniary loss sustained, or those which are the natural and proximate result of the breach, we reverse.”
Establishes the general rule limiting damages for breach of contract and the basis for reversal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFollowing a non-jury trial, the lower court awarded the appellee substantial punitive damages. The award was based on a compensatory judgment that sol…
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 Pecuniary Loss cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLER, J.
Appellant, Alf Aanonsen, challenges a final judgment awarding appellee, Michael A. Suarez, as Trustee of the Mas Family Trust, a substantial sum of punitive damages following a non-jury trial. Reaffirming the principle that, absent proof of a separate and independent tort, damages arising out of breach of contract are generally limited to the pecuniary loss sustained, or those which are the natural and proximate result of the breach, we reverse. See Lewis v. Guthartz, 428 So. 2d 222, 223 (Fla. 1982) (citing Griffith v. Shamrock Vill., Inc., 94 So. 2d 854, 858 (Fla. 1957)).
Here, the joint and several compensatory judgment, relied upon by Suarez as a basis for punitive damages, merely awarded the liquidated balance of the amount due and owing under a breached agreement. No further competent evidence of damages was forthcoming.
Consequently, Suarez failed to adequately allege and prove both “a tort independent from the acts that breach[ed] the contract” and non-duplicative damages grounded in tort.1 Inc. v.
N. Am. Van Lines, Inc., 687 So. 2d 821, 822 (Fla. 1996); see Ghodrati v. Miami Paneling Corp., 770 So. 2d 181, 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (“A plaintiff, however, may not recover damages for fraud that duplicate damages awarded for breach of contract.”) (citing Williams v. Peak Resorts Int’l, Inc., 676 So. 2d 513, 517 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Fla.1 Nor was there evidence of “wrongful conduct . . . [that] was motivated solely by unreasonable financial gain.” § 768.73(1)(b), Fla. Stat. Temps, Inc. v. Shannon Props., Inc., 645 So. 2d 102 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Green Mountain Corp., Inc. v. Frink, 604 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Rosen v. Marlin, 486 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)); see also Lewis, 428 So. 2d at 223 (“We reaffirm the rule and its underlying policy: an unwillingness to introduce uncertainty and confusion into business transactions as well as the feeling that compensatory damages as substituted performance are an adequate remedy for an aggrieved party to a breached contract.”) (citing Simpson, Punitive Damages for Breach of Contract, 20 Ohio St. L.J. 284 (1959)).
Thus, we reverse the final judgment under review and remand with instructions to enter judgment for Aanonsen on Suarez’s second amended complaint for punitive damages.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Griffith v. Shamrock Vill., Inc., 94 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 1957)
- Murray Rosen v. Marlin, 486 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Lewis v. Barnett Guthartz, 428 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 1982)
- Ferguson Transp., Inc. v. Ferguson Transp., Inc., 687 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1996)
- Williams v. Peak Resorts Int'l Inc., 676 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Fla. Temps, Inc. v. Shannon Props., Inc., 645 So. 2d 102 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- The Green Mountain Corp., Inc. v. Frink, 604 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)