Ford Motor Credit Co. 2d 956

525 Words3 Pages
Key Facts: (Who are the parties? What are they fighting about? Who is suing whom for what?) Susan Kirkpatrick, Appellant; John Zitz and Transamerica Insurance Company, Appelles; Kirkpatrick originally filed a complaint in trial court for a skunk bite she received while in a pet store owned by John Zitz. The trial court dismissed the complaint. Susan Kirkpatrick then appealed the decision, suing the insurance company of John Zitz, Transamerica Insurance Company, for intentional infliction of emotional distress by telling Zitz to not tell Kirkpatrick that the skunk she was bitten by, had been lost. Procedural History: (How did this case get to this court? What occurred before in the court below, if any?) John Zitz, owner of the pet store, was sued in trial court for injuries sustained by…show more content…
Rule: (What rule, statute, precedent, definition or standard did the court use to resolve the dispute?) Precedent: Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Sheehan, 373 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979): In the mentioned case, the court concluded that there is no bar to such an action when the conduct is so outrageous and extreme that it goes beyond the bounds of decency; Lay v. Roux Laboratories, Inc., 379 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980): In Lay v. Roux Laboratories, the court concluded that if ones conduct is outrageous and extreme in that it evidences a disregard for human life, then it is reasonable to say that there is a high probability that severe emotional distress will follow. Holding: (What rule, definition or standard did the court use to resolve the dispute?) Kirkpatricks ' complaint against Transamerica Insurance Company adequately states a cause of action, in which the court reversed the lower courts decision and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the appellate courts
Open Document