Augustine v. Southern Bell Telephone Tel. Co.

5 Citing cases

  1. Dem. Republic of the Congo v. Air Capital Grp., LLC

    CASE NO. 12-20607-CIV-ROSENBAUM/SELTZER (S.D. Fla. May. 28, 2013)

    Under Florida law, special damages "are considered to be the natural but not the necessary result of an alleged wrong or breach of contract." Augustine v. S. Belt Tel. & Tel. Co., 91 So. 2d 320, 323 (Fla. 1956). Special damages are those that "do not follow by implication of law merely upon proof of the breach.

  2. Ellis v. Crockett

    51 Haw. 45 (Haw. 1969)   Cited 58 times
    Holding that collateral estoppel is properly raised under HRCP Rule 12(b) where it “appears from the face of the complaint or from the taking of judicial notice or prior interrelated proceedings which are alluded to in the complaint”

    General damages are said to encompass all the damages which naturally and necessarily result from a legal wrong done. Augustine v. Southern Bell Telephone Telegraph Co., 91 So.2d 320, 323 (Fla. 1956). Such damages follow by implication of law upon proof of a wrong.

  3. Shands Teaching Hosp. v. Beech St.

    899 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 44 times
    Reversing dismissal of provider's unjust enrichment claim against health plan administrator when no express contract existed between them.

    The measure or amount of damages is not at issue at this point in the proceedings. See Hutchison v. Tompkins, 259 So.2d 129, 132 (Fla. 1972) ("It is well established in Florida that where the allegations of a complaint show the invasion of a legal right, the plaintiff on the basis thereof may recover at least nominal damages, and a motion to dismiss should be overruled.") (citing Augustine v. S. Bell Tel. Tel. Co., 91 So.2d 320, 323 (Fla. 1956)); Williams v. Bay Hosp., Inc., 471 So.2d 626, 630 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (holding that the remedy to avoid claims for impermissible elements of damage is a motion to strike the damage claim, or an objection at trial to the damage claim, but not dismissal of the complaint); Williams v. Legree, 206 So.2d 13, 15 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968) ("[A] complaint which sufficiently states a cause of action is not rendered vulnerable to a motion to dismiss by its allegation of an improper element of damages."). Section 215.422, Florida Statutes, which governs the processing of state warrants, vouchers and invoices, has no bearing at this juncture, if at all.

  4. RDR Computer Consulting Corp. v. Eurodirect, Inc.

    884 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 9 times
    Holding that proposal for settlement by one defendant did not require a separate allocation for a second defendant whose name actually appeared in the style of the case but whom the plaintiff was not suing

    After Argonaut, this court clearly cannot compel plaintiffs to specially plead an element of damage that does not require special pleading as special damage under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.120(g); see also Augustine v. S. Bell Tel. Tel. Co., 91 So.2d 320 (Fla. 1956). A trial court may be authorized to include in its standard pretrial order a requirement that a party indicate whether it is seeking prejudgment interest from the judge or from the jury.

  5. RDR CMPTR Cnsltng. v. Eurdrct

    Case No. 2D03-3140 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Jun. 18, 2004)

    After Argonaut, this court clearly cannot compel plaintiffs to specially plead an element of damage that does not require special pleading as special damage under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.120(g); see also Augustine v. S. Bell Tel. Tel. Co., 91 So.2d 320 (Fla. 1956). A trial court may be authorized to include in its standard pretrial order a requirement that a party indicate whether it is seeking prejudgment interest from the judge or from the jury.