Morton v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Morton v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co.

525 So. 2d 470, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1195, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2000, 1988 WL 47497

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 18, 1988

DocketNo. 87-0396

StatusPublished

This text of 525 So. 2d 470 (Morton v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Morton v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co., 525 So. 2d 470, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1195, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2000, 1988 WL 47497 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We are of the opinion that the allegations of the count in plaintiffs complaint for intentional infliction of emotional distress were sufficient to state a cause of action. Accordingly, we reverse the order which dismissed this count with prejudice and the final judgment entered thereon. See Estate of Morton v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, 460 So.2d 526 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Dominguez v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, 438 So.2d 58 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), approved 467 So.2d 281 (Fla.1985); Dependable Life Insurance Company v. Harris, 510 So.2d 985 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987).

Secondly, we are of the opinion that there were genuine issues of material fact which precluded entry of summary final judgment as concerns the count for slander found in the plaintiffs complaint. Among others, there was an issue as to whether the alleged slanderous statements were actually made and an issue as to whether the statements were made by an independent contractor not in the course and scope of his employment. Singer v. Star, 510 So.2d 637 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Blanco v. Allen, 509 So.2d 1356, 1357 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Thus, we reverse this final summary judgment.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HERSEY, C.J., and DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We are of the opinion that the allegations of the count in plaintiffs complaint for intentional infliction of emotional distress were sufficient to state a cause of action. Accordingly, we reverse the order which dismissed this count with prejudice and the final judgment entered thereon. See Estate of Morton v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, 460 So.2d 526 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Dominguez v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, 438 So.2d 58 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), approved 467 So.2d 281 (Fla.1985); Dependable Life Insurance Company v. Harris, 510 So.2d 985 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987).

Secondly, we are of the opinion that there were genuine issues of material fact which precluded entry of summary final judgment as concerns the count for slander found in the plaintiffs complaint. Among others, there was an issue as to whether the alleged slanderous statements were actually made and an issue as to whether the statements were made by an independent contractor not in the course and scope of his employment. Singer v. Star, 510 So.2d 637 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Blanco v. Allen, 509 So.2d 1356, 1357 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Thus, we reverse this final summary judgment.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HERSEY, C.J., and DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

525 So. 2d 470, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1195, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2000, 1988 WL 47497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morton-v-united-states-fidelity-guaranty-insurance-co-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack