Willis v. GAMI GOLDEN GLADES, LLC.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the victim of a mugging, where the gunman pressed the gun to the victim’s temple and touched her body searching for her belongings, could recover damages for her emotional distress
• stating that a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress requires either some kind of physical impact suffered by the plaintiff or mental distress that manifests itself in the form of physical injury
• explaining that the rule is met when any “outside force or substance, no matter how large or small, visible or invisible, and no matter that the effects are not immediately deleterious, touch[es] or enter[s] into the plaintiff's body”
• robber’s putting of pistol to plaintiffs head during robbery satisfied impact rule where claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress was based on hotel’s alleged negligence in failing to provide adequate security
• “In Florida, the prerequisites for recovery for negligent infliction of emotional distress differ depending on whether the plaintiff has or has not suffered a physical impact from an external force.” (emphasis added)
• “When an impact or touching has occurred the rule has no application.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).