WFTV, Inc. v. Hinn, 97-3105

Decision Date06 February 1998
Docket NumberNo. 97-3105,97-3105
Parties23 Fla. L. Weekly D425 WFTV, INC., A Delaware Corporation, Petitioner, v. Christopher HINN, Respondent.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Scott W. Cichon, Jonathan D. Kaney, Jr. and Jonathan D. Kaney, III of Cobb, Cole & Bell, Daytona Beach, for Petitioner.

Gus R. Benitez and Roger B. Butcher of Benitez & Butcher, P.A., Orlando, for Respondent.

COBB, Judge.

Petitioner, WFTV, Inc., seeks certiorari review of an order denying its motion to strike a punitive damages claim. We have jurisdiction. See Globe Newspaper Co. v. King, 658 So.2d 518 (Fla.1995) (district court of appeal has certiorari jurisdiction to review whether the trial court followed the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes).

Respondent, Christopher Hinn, was the subject of a whistleblower feature on WFTV's news program. Hinn sued WFTV pursuant to section 540.08, Florida Statutes (1997) (unauthorized publication of name or likeness), because WFTV used a videotape featuring him to advertise its news program. In the complaint, Hinn sought both compensatory and punitive damages. WFTV filed a motion to strike the punitive damages, which the trial court denied after a hearing.

Before a claim for punitive damages is allowed, a plaintiff must first comply with section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1997). That statute requires an initial showing by evidence in the record or proffered by the claimant which would provide a reasonable basis for recovery of such damages. A plaintiff must obtain leave from the trial court to amend the complaint before a claim for punitive damages can be asserted. See Simeon, Inc. v. Cox, 671 So.2d 158 (Fla.1996).

Section 540.08(2), Florida Statutes (1997) authorizes recovery of punitive damages, but does not provide any procedure by which such claim may be pled. Hinn asserts that section 768.72 is not applicable to a cause of action under section 540.08. We disagree, and find that sections 540.08 and 768.72 should be read together. Although section 540.08 allows for the recovery of punitive damages, the procedure enacted by the legislature in section 768.72 must be followed. Cf. State Capital Insurance Co. v. Mattey, 689 So.2d 1295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).

At the hearing on the motion to strike, Hinn made several arguments, including that the record showed a reasonable basis for punitive damages in that WFTV admitted in its answer that it continued to run the advertisement after being requested to stop. Evidence or argument presented at the hearing on the motion to strike would not satisfy the procedural requirements of section 768.72, as construed by the supreme court in Simeon, Inc. See also Mayer v. Frank, 659 So.2d 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (procedure in section 768.72 must be strictly enforced, although in some cases...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Cohen v. Office Depot
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • 17 Agosto 1999
    ...prior to a party asking for and receiving leave of the court must be dismissed or stricken."). See also WFTV, Inc. v. Hinn, 705 So.2d 1010, 1011 (Fla. 5th Dist.Ct.App.1998); Mayer v. Frank, 659 So.2d 1254, 1255 (Fla. 4th Thus, if 768.72 applies in this case, the district court correctly str......
  • Hall v. Lexington Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 16 Febrero 2005
    ...Inc. v. Cox, 671 So.2d 158, 160 (Fla.1996); see also Stephanos v. Paine, 727 So.2d 1075, 1076 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); WFTV, Inc. v. Hinn, 705 So.2d 1010, 1011 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). To comply with the requirements of the statute, a plaintiff must obtain leave from the trial court to amend the co......
  • Stephanos v. Paine, 98-3103.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 24 Febrero 1999
    ...Inc. v. Cox, 671 So.2d 158, 160 (Fla.1996); Mayer v. Frank, 659 So.2d 1254, 1255 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); see also WFTV, Inc. v. Hinn, 705 So.2d 1010, 1011 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). As the supreme court stated in Simeon: [i]n this case, the plaintiffs did not comply with the procedures of this secti......
  • ATLANTIC EXTERMINATING OF NORTH FLA. INC. v. Alvarez, 1D01-2881.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 7 Mayo 2002
    ...with instructions to strike the claim for punitive damages. See Simeon, Inc. v. Cox, 671 So.2d 158 (Fla. 1996); WFTV, Inc. v. Hinn, 705 So.2d 1010 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); section 768.72, Fla. Stat. BOOTH, MINER and KAHN, JJ., concur. ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT