ELEC. SEC. Sys. v. S. Bell, 482 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). · Go Syfert
Search
ELEC. SEC. Sys. v. S. Bell, 482 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort.... it is only when the breach of contract is attended by some additional conduct which amounts to an independent tort that such breach can constitute negligence.”
49 citation events (26 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Kazak and Kazak Real Estate v. Truist (flmd, 2023-09-11)
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986 2006 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 32 distinct citers.
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Kazak and Kazak Real Estate v. Truist
M.D. Fla. · 2023 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort.... it is only when the breach of contract is attended by some additional conduct which amounts to an independent tort that such breach can constitute negligence.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Hallucination Media, LLC v. The Ritz Ybor, LLC
Bankr. M.D. Fla. · 2021 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
it is only when the breach of contract is attended by some additional conduct which amounts to an independent tort that such breach can constitute .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) JustTech, LLC v. Kaseya US LLC (2×)
S.D. Fla. · 2023 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So. 2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (finding that defendant’s alleged duty to insert advertisement into local newspaper was not independent of contract with plaintiff); Burdick v. Bank of Am., N.A., 99 F. Supp. 3d 1372, 1378 (S.D.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Bautech USA, Inc. v. Resolve Equipment, Inc.
S.D. Fla. · 2023 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So. 2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (alteration added; citations omitted).
cited Cited as authority (rule) MidAmerica C2L Incorporated v. Siemens Energy, Inc.
11th Cir. · 2022 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. Dist.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Inspirations Nevada LLC v. Med Pro Billing, Inc.
S.D. Fla. · 2021 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So. 2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (“[A] breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort. . . .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Pro Music Rights, LLC v. Meijer, Inc.
M.D. Fla. · 2021 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Dist.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Burdick v. Bank of America, N.A.
S.D. Ind. · 2015 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Tiara Condominium Association, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (2×)
11th Cir. · 2013 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (“[A] breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort---- It is only when the breach of contract is attended by some additional conduct which amounts to an independent tort that such breach can constitute negligence.” (citations omitted)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Tiara Condominium Ass'n v. Marsh & McLennan Companies
Fla. · 2013 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (“[A] breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort....
cited Cited as authority (rule) Bank of America, National Association v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
D.D.C. · 2012 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So. 2d 518, 519 (Fla. Dist.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Bank of America, N. A. v. Federal Deposit Insurance
D.C. Cir. · 2012 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) ZAKI KULAIBEE ESTABLISHMENT v. McFLICKER
S.D. Fla. · 2011 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Hobirn, Inc. v. Aerotek, Inc.
S.D. Fla. · 2011 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) JDI HOLDINGS, LLC v. Jet Management, Inc.
N.D. Fla. · 2010 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kone, Inc. v. Robinson
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (stating that "breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort . . . . [and][i]t is only when the breach of contract is attended by some additional conduct which amounts to an independent tort that such breach can constitute negligence"); see also Weimar v. Yacht Club Point Estates, Inc., 223 So.2d 100, 103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)("[I]t has been frequently declared to be a rule that no cause of action in tort can arise from a breach of a duty existing by virtue of contract. . . .").
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Indemnity Ins. Co. v. American Aviation
Fla. · 2004 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (stating that "breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort . . . [and][i]t is only when the breach of contract is attended by some additional conduct which amounts to an independent tort that such breach can constitute negligence"); Weimar v. Yacht Club Point Estates, Inc., 223 So.2d 100, 103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969) ("[N]o cause of action in tort can arise from a breach of a duty existing by virtue of contract.").
cited Cited as authority (rule) Fun Spot of Florida, Inc. v. Magical Midway of Central Florida, Ltd.
M.D. Fla. · 2002 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986). 3.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Galaxis USA, Ltd.
M.D. Fla. · 2002 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.App.3d D.C.A.1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Florida College of Osteopathic Medicine, Inc. v. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc.
M.D. Fla. · 1998 · confidence medium
“It is only when the breach of contract, is attended by some additional conduct which amount to an independent tort that such breach can constitute negligence.” See Accord Electronic Security Systems Corp. v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.App.3d Dist.1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Florida College of Osteopathic Medicine, Inc. v. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc.
M.D. Fla. · 1997 · confidence medium
“It is only when the breach of contract is attended by some additional conduct which amount to an independent tort that such breach can constitute negligence.” Accord Electronic Security Systems Corp. v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.3d DCA1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Future Tech International, Inc. v. Tae Il Media, Ltd.
S.D. Fla. · 1996 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d Dist.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Oscar Mayer Foods Corp. v. Pruitt
D. Maryland · 1994 · confidence medium
Electronic Security Systems, Corp. v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.3d Dist.1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Greenberg v. Mount Sinai Medical Center
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1993 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); see generally American Medical Int'l, Inc. v. Scheller, 590 So.2d 947 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (en banc), review dismissed, 602 So.2d 533 (Fla. 1992).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Elias v. Sun Bank/Miami, N.A.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1991 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Century 21 Admiral’s Port, Inc. v. Walker, 471 So.2d 544 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); MJZ Corp. v. Gulfstream First Bank & Trust, 420 So.2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Broward Nat’l Bank v. Bethel, 341 So.2d 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Interstate Securities Corp. v. Hayes Corp.
11th Cir. · 1991 · confidence medium
Corp. v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Interstate Securities Corporation v. Hayes Corporation
11th Cir. · 1991 · confidence medium
Corp. v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Kee, Ctl v. National Reserve Life Insurance Company
11th Cir. · 1990 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Kee v. National Reserve Life Insurance
11th Cir. · 1990 · confidence medium
Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Bankest Imports, Inc. v. Isca Corp.
S.D. Fla. · 1989 · confidence medium
It is only when the breach is attended by some additional conduct which amounts to an independent tort that such a breach can constitute negligence.” Electronic Security Systems Corp. v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 482 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).
discussed Cited "see" AFM Corp. v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel.
Fla. · 1987 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Electronic Security Systems Corp. v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 482 So.2d 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) ("[A] breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort... .
cited Cited "see, e.g." Afm Corporation, a Florida Corporation v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company, a New York Corporation
11th Cir. · 1986 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Electronic Security Systems Corp. v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 482 So.2d 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) with Safeco Title Insurance Co. v. Reynolds, 452 So.2d 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).
ELECTRONIC SECURITY SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Appellant,
v.
SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY, Appellee.
85-971.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Jan 28, 1986.
482 So. 2d 518
Barkdull, Hendry and Hubbart.
Cited by 40 opinions  |  Published

Dubow, Hoffmann & Pines and Helen Ann Hauser, Coral Gables, for appellant.

Walton, Lantaff, Schroeder & Carson and George W. Chesrow and Douglas H. Stein, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and HUBBART, JJ.

HENDRY, Judge.

Plaintiff Electronic Security Systems Corp. (ESS) appeals a final summary judgment in favor of defendant Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co. (Southern Bell) on ESS's claim for breach of contract and appeals a final judgment of dismissal on its tort claims.

The facts may be briefly stated. ESS entered into a contract with Southern Bell for the placement of advertising in the 1983-84 Greater Miami Yellow Pages, including a one-half page ad. The contract contained the following clause limiting Southern Bell's liability:

[*519] THE TELEPHONE COMPANY'S LIABILITY ON ACCOUNT OF ERRORS IN OR OMISSIONS OF SUCH ADVERTISING SHALL IN NO EVENT EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF CHARGES FOR THE ADVERTISING WHICH WAS OMITTED OR IN WHICH THE ERROR OCCURRED IN THE THEN CURRENT DIRECTORY ISSUE AND SUCH LIABILITY SHALL BE DISCHARGED BY ABATEMENT OF THE CHARGES FOR THE PARTICULAR LISTING OR ADVERTISEMENT IN WHICH THE OMISSION OR ERROR OCCURRED.

ESS's advertising did not appear in the directory. ESS filed a three-count complaint against Southern Bell. Count I was for breach of contract; ESS alleged that Southern Bell had failed to publish the contracted-for advertising. Count II was for negligence; ESS alleged that Southern Bell had breached a duty it owed to ESS by the omission of ESS's advertising. Count III was for intentional tort; ESS alleged that Southern Bell had intentionally omitted ESS's advertising.

On motion of Southern Bell, the trial court dismissed ESS's negligence and intentional tort counts for failure to state a cause of action. The court gave ESS forty-five days to file an amended complaint. Upon ESS's failure to amend within the requisite time period, a final judgment dismissing the tort claims was entered by the trial court.

Southern Bell then moved for summary judgment on the remaining count for breach of contract. It agreed that ESS's advertising did not appear in the directory, but it argued that the limitation of liability clause precluded any recovery except for that provided in the contract. The trial court granted final summary judgment for Southern Bell.

On appeal, ESS first contends that the trial court erred in entering a final judgment of dismissal on its tort claims. It contends that the allegations raised in those counts sufficiently stated a cause of action for negligence and for intentional tort. We do not agree. ESS's negligence count was based solely on the breach of contract claim. Since a breach of contract, alone, cannot constitute a cause of action in tort, the trial court properly dismissed the negligence count. See Douglas v. Braman Porsche Audi, Inc., 451 So.2d 1038 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Belford Trucking Co. v. Zagar, 243 So.2d 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). It is only when the breach of contract is attended by some additional conduct which amounts to an independent tort that such breach can constitute negligence. See Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co. v. Hanft, 436 So.2d 40 (Fla. 1983). ESS's intentional tort count likewise did not sufficiently state a cause of action. A breach of contract cannot be converted into a tort merely by allegations of malice. American International Land Corp. v. Hanna, 323 So.2d 567 (Fla. 1975); Days v. Florida East Coast Railway Co., 165 So.2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). We find the trial court properly dismissed ESS's intentional tort complaint.

ESS next contends that the trial court erred in entering summary judgment on the breach of contract claim as the provision limiting Southern Bell's liability is unenforceable. Again, we do not agree. A similar provision has been recognized as valid in Florida in an action against a telephone company for loss of business arising from an error in the plaintiff's yellow pages listing. Advance Service, Inc. v. General Telephone Co. of Florida, 187 So.2d 660 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966). Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of cases have upheld contract provisions limiting a telephone company's liability for errors or omissions in a directory listing. McTighe v. New England Telephone and Telegraph Co., 216 F.2d 26 (2d Cir.1954); Vails v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 504 F. Supp. 740 (W.D.Okla. 1980); Pilot Industries v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 495 F. Supp. 356 (D.S.C. 1979); Robinson Insurance & Real Estate, Inc. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 366 F. Supp. 307 (W.D.Ark. 1973); Neering v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 169 F. Supp. 133 (S.D.Fla.[*520] 1958); Mendel v. Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Co., 117 Ariz. 491, 573 P.2d 891 (Ct.App. 1977); University Hills Beauty Academy v. Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Co., 38 Colo. App. 194, 554 P.2d 723 (1976); Woodburn v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 275 N.W.2d 403 (Iowa 1979); Wille v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 219 Kan. 755, 549 P.2d 903 (1976); Roll-up Shutters, Inc. v. South Central Bell Telephone Co., 394 So.2d 796 (La. Ct. App.), cert. denied, 399 So.2d 599 (La. 1981); Montana ex rel. Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Co. v. District Court of the Second Judicial District, 160 Mont. 443, 503 P.2d 526 (1972); Gas House, Inc. v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 289 N.C. 175, 221 S.E.2d 499 (1976); Richard A. Berjian, D.O., Inc. v. Ohio Bell Telephone Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 147, 375 N.E.2d 410 (1978); Affiliated Professional Services v. South Central Bell Telephone Co., 606 S.W.2d 671 (Tenn. 1980); Morris v. Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Co., 658 P.2d 1199 (Utah 1983); Allen v. General Telephone Co. of the Northwest, 20 Wash. App. 144, 578 P.2d 1333 (1978). [1] We find no error in the trial court's entry of summary judgment in favor of Southern Bell on the breach of contract claim.

For the foregoing reasons and based upon the authorities cited, the final summary judgment and final judgment of dismissal appealed are affirmed.

Affirmed.

1 Contra Allen v. Mich. Bell Tel. Co., 18 Mich. App. 632, 171 N.W.2d 689 (1969); Rozeboom v. Northwestern Bell Tel. Co., 358 N.W.2d 241 (S.D. 1984); Discount Fabric House of Racine, Inc. v. Wis. Tel. Co., 117 Wis.2d 587, 345 N.W.2d 417 (1984). See generally Annot. 92 A.L.R.2d 917 (1963) (regarding liability of telephone company for mistakes or omissions in its directory).