276 So.3d 878
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2019Background
- Robert Reid, a state prisoner, sued his postconviction attorney Bernard Daley for fraud, deceit, dishonesty, and misrepresentation, alleging Daley accepted $4,500 to file postconviction motions and failed to perform.
- Reid attached cashier’s checks totaling $4,500 and sought that amount plus $25,000 for mental anguish and emotional distress.
- The trial court dismissed Reid’s original complaint for failure to state a cause of action; Reid filed an amended complaint repeating the allegations and attaching the checks.
- Daley moved to dismiss the amended complaint, arguing it still failed to state a cause of action and that the amount-in-controversy was below the circuit court’s $15,000 jurisdictional threshold.
- The trial court dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice and closed the file; Reid appealed, arguing he should have been allowed to amend again.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether amended complaint states a cause of action for emotional distress arising from attorney misconduct | Reid contends Daley’s failure to perform postconviction work caused severe mental anguish and emotional distress | Daley contends Reid’s allegations are merely intangible emotional harms not tied to physical impact and thus barred by the impact rule | Court held Reid’s emotional distress claims fail under the impact rule because no physical impact or applicable exception was pleaded |
| Whether narrow Rowell exception to impact rule applies (wrongful pretrial confinement exception) | Reid argues emotional harm from ineffective postconviction assistance justifies damages | Daley argues Rowell is limited to cases of wrongful, ongoing pretrial confinement and is inapplicable here | Court refused to extend Rowell; Reid was serving a lawful sentence and facts don’t fit the narrow exception |
| Whether circuit court has subject-matter jurisdiction (amount-in-controversy) | Reid alleged $29,500 total ($4,500 actual loss + $25,000 emotional distress) to meet $15,000 threshold | Daley argues only $4,500 actual loss is supported by the attached checks, so amount-in-controversy is below jurisdictional threshold | Court held without recoverable emotional distress damages, the claimed losses are limited to $4,500 shown by checks, so no jurisdiction for circuit court |
| Whether plaintiff should have been given leave to further amend | Reid argues trial court erred by not allowing a second amended complaint | Daley argues amendments could not cure the jurisdictional defect because the attached checks show actual loss | Court held amendment would be futile because the attached cashier’s checks demonstrate Reid cannot in good faith plead an amount meeting circuit-court jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Bohatka, 112 So. 3d 596 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (scope of review on motion to dismiss and leave-to-amend guidance)
- Kairalla v. John D. Catherine T. MacArthur Found., 534 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (requirement to allow amendment unless amendment cannot state a cause of action)
- Grunewald v. Warren, 655 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (good-faith assessment of amount in complaint for jurisdictional purposes)
- R.J. v. Humana of Fla., Inc., 652 So. 2d 360 (Fla. 1995) (impact rule for emotional distress damages)
- Rowell v. Holt, 850 So. 2d 474 (Fla. 2003) (narrow exception to impact rule for wrongful pretrial confinement due to attorney misconduct)
- Tanner v. Hartog, 696 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1997) (examples of torts with predominantly emotional harms falling outside impact rule)
- Sullivan v. Nova Univ., 613 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (attached documents controlling alleged amount in controversy)