Action For Money Had And Received

56 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Jacksonville Am. Publ'g Co. v. Jacksonville Paper Co.
  143 Fla. 835· Fla.· 1940-08-02 ·cited 57×
  Jacksonville Paper Company sued Jacksonville American Publishing Company for an unpaid account balance of $187.75. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the judgment on certiorari, holding that a corporation may be bound by its president's promises to pay a debt within the statute o
• Morgan Guar. Tr. Co. OF NEW York v. Martin
  466 F.2d 593· 7th Cir.· 1972-08-15 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the action under Rule 19 for failure to join an indispensable party, as there was no substantial risk of double liability for the defendant.
• Campbell v. The Kauffman Milling Co.
  42 Fla. 328· Fla.· 1900-06-01 ·cited 48×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed an equity decree that gave the Kauffman Milling Company priority rights to flour accounts and their proceeds held by the assignee Campbell. The court held that the Milling Company forfeited its right to pursue the accounts in specie by electing
• Edgar v. Maude Milling Bacon
  97 Fla. 679· Fla.· 1929-05-01 ·cited 39×
  A married woman and her husband sued to recover $5,000 paid as a deposit on a real estate contract that the seller allegedly refused to perform. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the judgment, holding that the trial court erred by allowing the married woman to recover money paid
• Armour & Co. v. Carl
  154 Fla. 86· Fla.· 1944-02-18 ·cited 38×
  Armour & Company sought equitable accounting and relief for funds allegedly held in trust by attorney Lambdin, who collected $1,413.75 from a judgment execution that had been assigned to Armour. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of the equity suit, holding that Armour
• Marks v. Fields
  160 Fla. 789· Fla.· 1948-05-11 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court addressed whether a plaintiff could switch from an action in deceit to an action for money had and received after the trial judge directed a verdict in the defendant's favor. The case involved alleged fraudulent misrepresentations about zoning law affect
• A. G. Reeves Steel Const. Co. v. Weiss
  119 F.2d 472· 6th Cir.· 1941-05-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the appellant's action to recover overpaid taxes was barred by the statute of limitations because the Commissioner's notification of crediting refunds against other tax liabilities constituted a disallowance of the refund claims.
• Econ. Plumbing & Heating Co., Inc. v. The United States
  470 F.2d 585· Ct. Cl.· 1972-12-12 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge argues that the plaintiff should have the option to pursue relief as a taxpayer, even if the funds seized were not ultimately theirs, similar to prior cases.
• Strubbe v. Adolph Sonnenschein
  299 F.2d 185· 2d Cir.· 1962-01-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that New Jersey law applied, making the forged assignments void as to the beneficiary, and affirmed the judgment for the beneficiary against the insurer. It reversed the finding of fraud against the loan company but modified the judgment to allow recovery for unaut
• Howard v. United States
  125 F.2d 986· 5th Cir.· 1942-02-06 ·cited 22×
  Gifts inter vivos between spouses, revocable under state law, are subject to federal estate tax. Louisiana legal presumptions regarding community property are applicable in federal tax cases to determine ownership.
• Gordon v. Camp
  2 Fla. 422· Fla.· 1849-01-01 ·cited 22×
  In this 1849 Florida case, the court addresses whether an action for money had and received can be maintained against an unpaid agent who received Florida currency to convert to specie or northern funds but failed to remit the proceeds. The court holds that such an action lies an
• United States v. Aquavella
  615 F.2d 12· 2d Cir.· 1979-12-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in finding it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review the merits of the government's overpayment claims and the provider's defenses, and that the government's claims were compulsory counterclaims that should have been asserted in
• Siegel OIL Co. v. Gulf OIL Corp.
  701 F.2d 149· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1983-02-01 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim was barred by the applicable statute of limitations, as it accrued when the defendant designated a substitute supplier, not through a continuing violation.
• Haberman v. The Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States
  224 F.2d 401· 5th Cir.· 1955-06-30 ·cited 16×
  An annuity issued by a regulated insurance company is not a 'security' under the Texas Securities Act, and a foreign corporation's failure to comply with a general business registration statute does not entitle a party to restitution after substantial performance or tender of per
• Barnett Guthartz v. Lewis
  408 So. 2d 600· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-12-08 ·cited 14×
  Apartment complex owner Guthartz was sued by tenants who claimed they were overcharged on rent and security deposits in violation of an FHA regulatory agreement. The trial court found liability, awarded compensatory damages of over $105,000 plus punitive damages of $1 million and
• Roybark v. United States
  218 F.2d 164· 9th Cir.· 1954-12-20 ·cited 13×
  The court held that a taxpayer seeking a refund must prove they overpaid their taxes, even if the government's initial assessment was based on a flawed theory.
• United States v. Harris
  216 F.2d 690· 5th Cir.· 1954-11-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for the plaintiff because the plaintiff failed to provide proof that over-ceiling prices were actually paid, which is necessary to establish an illegal exaction for a tax refund.
• United States v. Drescher
  179 F.2d 863· 2d Cir.· 1950-02-16 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge believes the full cost of annuity contracts purchased by an employer for executives should be taxed as additional compensation, regardless of nonassignability or nonaccelerability.
• Town of River Junction v. Md. Cas. Co.
  133 F.2d 57· 5th Cir.· 1943-01-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a surety who completes a public work after contractor default has priority over a bank to funds held by the owner, even if the bank loaned money to the contractor to pay laborers and materialmen.
• Young v. Victory
  112 Fla. 66· Fla.· 1933-09-22 ·cited 12×
  A widow challenged enforcement of a mortgage held by a subsequent purchaser, claiming the original transaction with a fraudulent investment trust was void due to lack of authority to sell securities and systematic fraud. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decree
• Reconstr. Fin. Corp. v. Serv. Pipe Line Co.
  206 F.2d 814· 10th Cir.· 1953-07-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the allowance or disallowance of interest rests in the discretion of the trial court, and in this case, the trial court acted within its discretion by disallowing interest.
• Herrmann v. Gleason
  126 F.2d 936· 6th Cir.· 1942-04-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that appellants are entitled to interest on the backdated rental payments due to the receiver's unjust enrichment during the period of arbitration.
• Ferguson v. Abe Cotler
  382 So. 2d 1315· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-04-23 ·cited 9×
  The court held that a party can recover money paid by mistake, even if the mistake was unilateral, provided the recipient cannot show a legal or equitable right to retain it and has not detrimentally relied on the mistake.
• Okeechobee Cnty. v. Nuveen
  145 F.2d 684· 5th Cir.· 1944-11-18 ·cited 9×
• The Citizens & S. Nat'l Bank v. Am. Sur. Co. OF NEW York
  347 F.2d 18· 5th Cir.· 1965-06-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant bank, which paid over a second forged check drawn on a depositor's account, could not escape liability to the plaintiff (assignee of the first bank and depositor) based on the doctrine of Price v. Neal or inconsistent remedies, as the funds remai
• Shutt v. United States
  218 F.2d 10· 5th Cir.· 1954-01-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the government could recover overpayments based on defendant's certifications, and the statute of limitations did not bar the claim.
• Ryan v. Spaniol
  193 F.2d 551· 10th Cir.· 1951-12-31 ·cited 8×
  The plaintiff, who failed to provide certificates of title as required by Missouri law, cannot recover from the defendant who purchased the vehicles in good faith, as the plaintiff's actions enabled the loss.
• Empire Box Corp. of Stroudsburg v. Delaware
  171 F.2d 389· 2d Cir.· 1948-12-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a railroad carrier cannot accept an oral waiver of a written notice requirement under its published tariffs and then later refund charges based on the lack of written notice, as the tariff rules must be strictly adhered to.
• Sirian Lamp Co. v. Manning
  123 F.2d 776· 3d Cir.· 1941-11-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a taxpayer may sue a collector of internal revenue for a refund of a partial tax payment even if the entire deficiency has not been paid.
• Betts v. Thrasher
  103 Fla. 926· Fla.· 1931-12-21 ·cited 8×
  Thrasher sought to recover a $5,000 down payment on real estate from Betts after the vendor failed to deliver marketable title within what Thrasher claimed was a reasonable time. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the judgment, holding that Betts exercised due diligence in furnis
• Price v. Hicks
  14 Fla. 565· Fla.· 1874-07-01 ·cited 8×
  This case involves a dispute over partnership property and assets between a surviving partner (Hicks) and the estate of his deceased partner (Fitts). The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court decree that awarded the surviving partner a substantial sum, holding that certain
• Richard v. Triester
  409 So. 2d 101· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-01-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in compromising the amount of overpayment and in failing to award interest and attorney's fees as provided by the contract.
• Equilease Corp. v. Hentz
  634 F.2d 850· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-20 ·cited 6×
  A party who receives money in good faith satisfaction of a valid claim, or who has changed their position in reliance on the payment, cannot be compelled to make restitution even if the payment was made by mistake.
• Paddock v. United States
  280 F.2d 563· 2d Cir.· 1960-06-29 ·cited 6×
  In a tax refund suit, the burden of proof for the 50% fraud addition to tax rests upon the government, not the taxpayer.
• State v. Civil Court of Record
  113 Fla. 335· Fla.· 1933-12-22 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Civil Court of Record lacked jurisdiction to order a disputed fund transferred to the county's forfeiture account without a proper judicial determination of forfeiture rights. The court issued a writ of prohibition to prevent enforcement of
• Chancey Ward and Charles P. May v. Jabez B. Bull and Richard A. Shine
  1 Fla. 271· Fla.· 1847-01-01 ·cited 6×
  In this 1847 case, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court judgment in favor of lessees who sought to recover rent paid in advance for a leased store that was destroyed by fire. The court held that while the lessees remained bound by their covenant to pay rent despite th
• Deco Purchasing & Distrib. Co., Inc. v. Panzirer
  450 So. 2d 1274· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-06-14 ·cited 4×
  Deco Purchasing sued for restitution of an advance on consulting fees paid to Jay Panzirer, who died before rendering any services. The trial court ruled in favor of Panzirer's widow Mary, but the appellate court reversed, holding that Deco was entitled to restitution because the
• Meehan v. Grimaldi & Grimaldi, Inc.
  240 F.2d 775· 5th Cir.· 1957-02-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the agency contract was a valid and binding agreement, creating a contractual obligation for the agent to remit collected premiums, thus the action was not barred by the statute of limitations or laches.
• Stone & Webster Eng'g Corp. v. Hamilton NAT. Bank
  199 F.2d 127· 6th Cir.· 1952-10-07 ·cited 4×
  An employer who receives stolen money from an employee, without providing valuable consideration, cannot claim title to the money and must return it to the defrauded party.
• Loughman v. Town OF Pelham (Employers Liab. Assur. Corp.
  126 F.2d 714· 2d Cir.· 1942-03-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a pledge of bank assets to secure a town deposit was ultra vires and that the statute of limitations barred recovery of proceeds from the sale of bonds, but not dividends paid under mutual mistake.
• Hawkins v. Garrison
  97 Fla. 156· Fla.· 1929-02-13 ·cited 4×
  Kenneth Hawkins sued J.H. Garrison for breach of a land sale contract after depositing $2,000 as earnest money. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's dismissal, holding that the complaint could proceed as an action for money had and received, even though it was fra
• Cap. City Bank of Tallahassee v. The Lewis State Bank
  143 Fla. 768· Fla.· 1940-07-23 ·cited 3×
  This case concerns a bank's liability for paying a check with an unauthorized endorsement. The court held that both banks involved were at fault and divided the loss equally between them.
• Anchor Sav. Bank v. Berlin
  445 So. 2d 675· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-02-22 ·cited 2×
  Anchor Savings Bank appeals a judgment denying its claim for unjust enrichment after it paid interest on a certificate of deposit twice—once to the original owner Bertha Berlin and again to Bank of Florida, which held an assignment of the certificate. The court held that Anchor i
• The Martin Luther King, JR. v. Am. Heritage Prods., Inc.
  694 F.2d 674· 11th Cir.· 1983-01-03 ·cited 2×
  The court should not create a new 'right of publicity' but should instead rely on existing remedies like unjust enrichment to address unconscionable conduct.
• Woodhull v. Minot Clinic
  259 F.2d 676· 8th Cir.· 1958-09-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's application of the statute of limitations was permissible, affirming the dismissal of the action.
• Gulf Life Ins. Co. v. Folsom
  806 F.2d 225· 11th Cir.· 1986-11-26
  In an action for money had and received, a plaintiff can generally recover a mistakenly made payment, even if caused by negligence, provided the other party is not prejudiced, subject to a weighing of equities by the trier of fact.
• In re Est. of Edward A. Brown v. Brown
  134 So. 2d 290· Fla. 2d DCA· 1961-11-08
  Sire Plan, Inc. appeals a probate court's assignment of dower from an $8,000 settlement fund to the widow of deceased attorney Edward A. Brown. The court holds that the probate court lacked jurisdiction to determine ownership of the fund where the parties' dispute involves an equ
• Shelley v. White
  11 Fla. Supp. 107· Pinellas Cty. Civ. & Crim. Ct. Rec.· 1957-07-30
  In a dispute over usurious loan transactions, the court held that a borrower's affirmative counterclaim for recovery of forfeited money is barred by Florida's two-year statute of limitations for statutory forfeitures, even though the usurious transactions are void ab initio. Howe
• Brinker-Johnson Co. & Walter W. Johnson v. Reconstr. Fin. Corp.
  236 F.2d 195· 9th Cir.· 1956-08-14
  The court held that the proper forum for claims arising from War Production Board Limitation Order L-208 is the Court of Claims, not the district court.
• Charles Blum Co. v. Town of Hastings
  76 Fla. 7· Fla.· 1918-06-17
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment dismissing Blum Company's claim for refund of liquor license fees. The court held that a municipality has an implied duty to refund the unused portion of a liquor license fee when the licensee is prevented from using the license throu