Davis v. Hilton, 4D00-233.
Decision Date | 07 March 2001 |
Docket Number | No. 4D00-233.,4D00-233. |
Citation | 780 So.2d 974 |
Parties | Thomas Irving DAVIS, Jr., Appellant, v. Lin HILTON, Herbert Hilton, her husband, and Charles Berlitz and Valerie Berlitz, his wife, Appellees. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
David M. Goldstein, Miami, for appellant.
Betsy E. Gallagher of Gallagher & Howard, P.A., Tampa, for appellees.
This is an appeal taken by plaintiff, Thomas Davis, from a summary final judgment granted to defendants/appellees, Lin Hilton, Herbert Hilton, Charles Berlitz and Valerie Berlitz. Appellant/plaintiff, Davis, sought money damages from his former wife, Hilton, her parents, Charles and Valerie Berlitz, and her husband, Herb Hilton, in a three count complaint filed in the general civil division of the circuit court. Davis and Lin Hilton are the natural parents of K.D., a minor child. Charles and Valerie Berlitz are the maternal grandparents of K.D. We affirm.
The first count of the complaint alleged that Lin Hilton alienated the parental relationship between Davis, the non-custodial parent, and his daughter, K.D. resulting in the intentional infliction of mental and emotional distress. The count alleged that Lin Hilton consistently prevented the non-custodial parent from seeing, talking to or contacting K.D. The count also alleged that defendant Hilton used her maiden surname "Berlitz" or married name "Hilton" in school and social matters "to foster disrespect, dislike and hatred of the plaintiff by his daughter, K.D." The count further alleged that Lin Hilton "breached her affirmative duty to encourage and nurture the minor child's relationship with the non-custodial parent...."
The second count of the complaint was also directed against Lin Hilton and asserted that she breached paragraph XII of a property settlement agreement. That portion of the agreement provides:
The parties agree and stipulate to the entry of an Order of the Court retraining [sic] each of the parties from disturbing the peace or harassing the other by verbal or non-verbal acts; further the parties agree that neither party shall attempt to alienate the affection of the child of the parties from the other party nor permit any other person to do so insofar as they can control or prevent the action of the person; neither party shall belittle or disparage the other, either in public or in private.
The third count of the complaint alleged a civil conspiracy and was directed against the three remaining defendants: Herbert Hilton, the husband of Lin Hilton, and Charles and Valerie Berlitz, the maternal grandparents of K.D. The third count specifically alleged that these three defendants "have conspired and aided and abetted the actions of the Defendant Lin Hilton in alienating the parental relationship between the Plaintiff THOMAS I. DAVIS and his daughter ... resulting in intentional infliction of mental distress on Plaintiff." The answers denied the material allegations of the complaint and affirmatively asserted that Davis himself eroded the relationship with his daughter. The answers alleged that his lack of interaction with his daughter was the result of court orders barring visitation.
Judge Streitfeld, in his order granting the amended motion for summary judgment of October 8, 1999, which was incorporated by reference in the final summary judgment of December 13, 1999, reasoned:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Woodburn v. Fla. Dep't of Children & Family Servs.
...parent. See Stone, 734 So.2d at 1045 (noting that cause of action “requires physical absence of child from home”); Davis v. Hilton, 780 So.2d 974, 976 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (same). Here, Woodburn alleges interference by the alleged taking of Lanaza's SSI benefits. She does not allege any phys......
-
Ponder v. Been
...protect marriage law is high, particularly as alienation of affections is no longer a claim under Florida law. Davis v. Hilton, 780 So. 2d 974, 975 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001) ("The clear language of Florida Statutes § 771.01 abolishes the claim of alienation of affections."). As to the conv......
-
Hutzel v. Franklin
... ... for alienation of affections); Davis" v. Hilton, 780 ... So.2d 974, 975 (Fla. 4th Dist. Ct. App. 2001) (noting that ... the \xE2\x80" ... ...
-
Family law proceedings and grounds
...61. Involvement of children in protracted litigation in pursuit of a money judgment cannot be in their best interests. [ Davis v. Hilton, 780 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).] Approach with caution. The family lawyer should be circumspect in filing tort actions. Many parties in FAMILY LAW PR......
-
Emergencies and case management conference
...for a modification of the parenting plan or time-sharing schedule, they are not grounds for an emergency petition. [ Davis v. Hilton, 780 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (there is no civil cause of action by one parent against other or third parties for alienation of parent child relationshi......
-
Intentional torts
...interfered with those rights.” Source Stewart v. Walker , 5 So.3d 746, 748 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). See Also 1. Davis v. Hilton , 780 So.2d 974, 975 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), rev. denied , 796 So.2d 536 (Fla. 2001). 2. Brown v. Brown , 800 So.2d 359, 361 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). §10:20.1.5 Elements of C......
-
Florida family law rules of procedure
...as there is no physical interference with the custodial relationship. These issues are best left for the family court. Davis v. Hilton , 780 So.2d 974 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Behr v. Foreman Genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether or not broker’s action of losing $4 million in an ......