Summary
This Report and Recommendation addresses a defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings in a pro se diversity action arising from alleged vehicle damage, personal injuries, and emotional distress. The court recommends dismissing Counts III and IV of the third amended complaint, concluding that the economic-damages claim is not an independent cause of action and is duplicative to the extent it asserts negligence, while the emotional-distress claims are inadequately pleaded. The recommendation leaves Counts I and II for further proceedings.
Holdings
- Economic damages are a form of monetary relief and do not constitute an independent cause of action; they must be sought in conjunction with a substantive claim.
- To the extent Count IV asserted negligence based on Plaintiff missing a business meeting because of damage to his truck, it was duplicative of Count I and should be dismissed.
- Plaintiff failed to plausibly state a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim because the alleged verbal remark involved no physical impact and the complaint did not adequately allege a physical injury manifested by, and occurring within a short time of, the incident.
- Even construing Count III as asserting intentional infliction of emotional distress, Plaintiff failed to plausibly allege extreme and outrageous conduct because an employee publicly yelling "alright Big Daddy," though possibly demeaning, did not go beyond all possible bounds of decency.
Questions Presented
- Whether Count IV stated an independent cause of action for economic damages under Florida law.
- Whether, to the extent Count IV asserted negligence based on missing a business meeting, it was duplicative of Count I.
- Whether Count III plausibly stated a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim under Florida's impact rule.
- Whether Count III, construed to include an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, plausibly alleged extreme and outrageous conduct.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (21)
- DeVillier v. Texas, 601 U.S. 285, 288 n.1 (2024)(followed)
- Jackson v. Williams Plant Services, LLC, No. 1:06cv1087, 2008 WL 11322913, at *3 (N.D. Ga. Dec. 22, 2008)(followed)
- Samara v. Taylor, 38 F.4th 141, 152 (11th Cir. 2022)(followed)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)(followed)
- Hodges v. United States, 78 F.4th 1365, 1375 (11th Cir. 2023)(followed)
- Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Hallgren, 124 So. 3d 350, 355 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)(followed)
- Tarasewicz v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, No. 14-CIV-60885, 2015 WL 1566398, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 8, 2015)(followed)
- Letidas Logistics, LLC v. Citibank, N.A., 789 F. Supp. 3d 1121, 1131 (S.D. Fla. 2025)(followed)
- Malverty v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, 407 F. Supp. 3d 1257, 1265 (M.D. Fla. 2019)(followed)
- Willis v. Gami Golden Glades, LLC, 967 So. 2d 846, 850 (Fla. 2007)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 21.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.