Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Augustine v. Southern Bell Telephone Tel. Co.

91 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 1956)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Augustine v. Southern Bell Telephone Tel. Co.

37 Citing cases

  1. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Colletti Invs., LLC

    199 So. 3d 395 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 2 times
    Holding that defendant's admitted knowledge from discovery and pleadings that plaintiff sought special damages in some but not all counts, cannot overcome plaintiff's failure to adequately plead special damages in only count of complaint on which plaintiff prevailed

    General damages, on the other hand, are damages that the law presumes actually and necessarily result from the alleged wrong or breach. See Augustine v. S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 91 So.2d 320, 323 (Fla.1956).The purpose of the special damages rule is to prevent surprise at trial.

  2. 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.

  3. Swope Rodante, P.A. v. Harmon

    Case No. 2D11-3228 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Mar. 28, 2012)   Cited 15 times

    One of the basic purposes of a motion to dismiss is to test the over-all sufficiency of the complaint to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Since the complaint states a claim upon which at least nominal damages may be awarded, then it follows that the motion to dismiss the amended counter-claim should not have been granted, even though some of the damages alleged may have been non-recoverable. Augustine v. Southern Bell Telephone & Tel. Co., Fla. 1956, 91 So. 2d 320.Abstract Co. of Sarasota v. Roberts, 144 So. 2d 3, 5 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962); see also Augustine v. S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 91 So. 2d 320, 323 (Fla. 1956) ("[I]f the complaint states a claim upon which at least nominal damages may be awarded, then a motion to dismiss such a complaint should not be sustained.").

  4. Land Title of Cen. Fl. v. Jimenez

    946 So. 2d 90 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 14 times
    Finding that a title insurance agency which acts as a closing agent owes a duty to conduct the closing in a reasonably prudent manner

    General damages, on the other hand, are damages that the law presumes actually and necessarily result from the alleged wrong or breach. See Augustine v. S. Bell Tel. Tel. Co., 91 So.2d 320, 323 (Fla. 1956). The purpose of the special damages rule is to prevent surprise at trial.

  5. Demello v. Buckman

    916 So. 2d 882 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 12 times
    Stating that a trustee's discretion is limited to "the discretion conferred upon him" by "the terms of the trust"

    In other words, they are such damages as do not follow by implication of law merely upon proof of the breach. On the other hand, general damages are those which the law presumes actually and necessarily result from the alleged breach or wrong. Augustine v. S. Bell Tel. Tel. Co., 91 So.2d 320, 323 (Fla. 1956). . . .

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. Thompson v. Kindred Nursing Centers East, LLC

    211 F. Supp. 2d 1345 (M.D. Fla. 2002)   Cited 256 times
    Denying motion to dismiss where the plaintiff averred in the complaint that "[a]ll conditions precedent to the filing of this action have been satisfied or have occurred" (alteration in original; citation and quotation marks omitted)

    This requirement has been construed by the Florida courts to mean that a claim for special damages is sufficiently pleaded to withstand a motion to strike if it notifies the defendant of the nature of the special damages claimed." Bazal v. Belford Trucking Co., Inc., 442 F. Supp. at 1100 (citing in part Augustine v. Southern Bell Telephone Telegraph Co., 91 So.2d 320, 323 (Fla. 1956)). The Bazal plaintiff alleged that he sought recovery for "emotional distress suffered." Id.

  10. Precision Tune Auto Care, Inc. v. Radcliffe

    804 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 15 times
    Finding no abuse of discretion in striking franchiser's pleadings based upon continued "foot dragging" and considerable delay in producing documents and participating in deposition

    On the other hand, general damages are those which the law presumes actually and necessarily result from the alleged breach or wrong. Augustine v. S. Bell Tel. Tel. Co., 91 So.2d 320, 323 (Fla. 1956). Based upon this definition, Radcliffe's contingent liability on the guarantees were special damages which may be the natural but not the necessary result of the breach of contract.