Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 771.04 (2025)

No act done in state to give cause of action.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

771.04 No act done in state to give cause of action.—No act hereafter done within this state shall operate to give rise, either within or without this state, to any of the rights of action abolished by this law. No contract to marry hereafter made or entered into in this state shall operate to give rise, either within or without this state, to any cause or right of action for the breach thereof.

History.—s. 4, ch. 23138, 1945.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1950–1997 · leading case: Tremblay v. Carter, 390 So. 2d 816 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Tremblay v. Carter, 390 So. 2d 816 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). · cites it 2× “§ 771.04, Fla. Stat. (1979). It would be an anomaly to permit a person to recover for the loss of consortium from a third party tortfeasor and yet deny that same person recovery *818 from his betrothed upon the failure to carry out the promise of marriage.”

Duttenhofer v. Duttenhofer, 474 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). · cites it 7× “[5] Florida's "heart balm" legislation, see § 771.04, Fla. Stat. (1983), [6] which abolished, inter alia, the cause of action for breach of promise to marry, [7] lends further support *255 for precluding the trial court from considering the appellant's forfeited Delta pension in…”

Wright v. Wright, 509 So. 2d 329 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). · cites it 3× “[3] In concluding that the statutory power of a trial court to consider "any other factor necessary to do equity and justice between the parties" was not intended to encompass consideration of premarital sacrifices, the Duttenhofer court purported to reason by analogy from…”

Sharon Wildey v. Richard A. Springs, Cross-Appellee, 47 F.3d 1475 (7th Cir. 1995). “” Fla. StatAnn. § 771.04 (1986). Illinois, too, out *1480 lawed the common law cause of action.”

Liappas v. Augoustis, 47 So. 2d 582 (Fla. 1950). “" In Section 771.04 it is provided that "No act hereafter done within this state shall operate to give rise, either within or without this state, to any of the rights of action abolished by this law.”

Hoffman v. Boyd, 698 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). “Section 771.04 solely addresses contracts to marry: No contract to marry hereafter made or entered into in this state shall operate to give rise, either within or without this state, to any cause or right of action for the breach thereof.”

Wildey v. Springs, 840 F. Supp. 1259 (N.D. Ill. 1994). · cites it 2× “Fla.Stat.Ann. § 771.04. 5 The *1264 Florida statute is unequivocal and covers suits brought “either within or without” the state of Florida.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.