Lay v. Roux Laboratories, Inc.

Decision Date06 February 1980
Docket NumberOO-474,Nos. OO-208,s. OO-208
Citation379 So.2d 451
PartiesDonesta S. LAY and Larry R. Lay, Appellants, v. ROUX LABORATORIES, INC., a New York Corporation, Appellee. Donesta S. LAY and Larry R. Lay, Appellants, v. George KREMER, Jr., Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Gail A. Gottardo of Searcy, Smith, Facciolo & Kirby, P. A., and Joseph Morrell, Jacksonville, for appellants.

Bruce S. Bullock of Bullock, Sharp & Childs, P. A., and Martin J. Mickler, Jacksonville, for appellee Roux Laboratories, Inc.

Charles Cook Howell, III, of Howell, Howell, Liles, Braddock & Milton, Jacksonville, for appellee George Kremer.

PER CURIAM.

The Lays appeal an order of the trial judge dismissing Roux Laboratories, Inc. as defendant and dismissing Count I of their three count complaint. We hold Count I was properly dismissed with prejudice because it failed to state a cause of action for the independent tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress in accordance with this Court's opinion in Ford Motor Credit Company v. Sheehan, 373 So.2d 956 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), wherein we stressed that the conduct alleged must be " 'so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.' " 373 So.2d at 959. Here, the alleged conduct of Kremer was that he "began to threaten her (Donesta Lay) with the loss of her job, then said defendant began using humiliating language, vicious verbal attacks, racial epithets and called plaintiff a 'nigger' " when an argument arose concerning a parking space. Although the alleged conduct is extremely reprehensible, we do not think that the alleged conduct reaches the level of outrageousness and atrociousness as that illustrated by Ford Motor Credit Company which involved a call by the credit company to plaintiff's home, relaying information that his children had been in a serious accident and that the caller was attempting to reach Sheehan. Seven hours passed before he discovered the report was false. Unfortunately, in our society, vulgarities and abusive language are commonplace when tempers flare and in this instance, the allegations are insufficient to serve as a predicate for the independent tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress. See also Dowling v. Blue Cross of Florida, Inc., 338 So.2d 88 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).

However, the remaining counts state a cause of action against Roux Laboratories, Inc., the employer of the alleged tortfeasor, Kremer. The oft-quoted rule is:

As a general rule under the principles of the common law an employer is liable in damages for the wrongful act of his employee that causes injury to another person, if the wrongful act is done while the employee is acting within the apparent scope of his authority as such employee to serve the interests of the employer, even though the wrongful act also constitutes a crime not a homicide or was not authorized by, or was forbidden by, the employer, or was not necessary or appropriate to serve the interests of the employer, unless the wrongful act of the employee was done to accomplish his own purposes, and not to serve the interests of the employer.

Stinson v. Prevatt, 84 Fla. 416, 94 So. 656 at 657 (1922); Jacobi v. Claude Nolan, Inc., 122 So.2d 783 at 788-789 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960). However, an employee is not acting in the scope of employment if it can be found that the employee...

To continue reading

Request your trial
58 cases
  • Taylor v. Metzger
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • 18 Febrero 1998
    ...employee was not extreme and outrageous conduct and thus not intentional infliction of emotional distress); Lay v. Roux Lab., Inc., 379 So.2d 451, 452 (Fla.App.1980) (holding a supervisor threatening to terminate a subordinate and uttering racial epithets was not sufficiently outrageous or ......
  • Vance v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • 5 Febrero 1993
    ...which the district court relied, the majority opinion cites only two 15 cases to support this ruling; Lay v. Roux Laboratories, Inc., 379 So.2d 451, 452 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1980) (per curiam), and Mundy, 676 F.2d at 505-506. I fail to see how either of these cases support this position. Not on......
  • Thompson v. Orange Lake Country Club, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • 23 Julio 2002
    ...99 So.2d 279, 280 — 81 (Fla.1957); accord Canto v. J.B. Ivey and Company, 595 So.2d 1025(Fla. 1st D.C.A.1992); Lay v. Roux Lab., Inc., 379 So.2d 451, 453 (Fla. 1st D.C.A.1980); Wackenhut Corp. v. Greene, 238 So.2d 431, 432 (Fla.3d III. APPLICATION A. Undisputed Facts Orange Lake is a timesh......
  • Hill v. Lee Cnty. Sheriff's Office
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • 24 Septiembre 2012
    ...and false accusations failed to state cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress); Lay v. Roux Labs., Inc., 379 So. 2d 451, 452 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (same);; Koutsouradis v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 427 F.3d 1339, 1345 (11th Cir. 2005) (insults and indignities do not supp......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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