Adverse Interest Exception

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

• Tew v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.
  728 F. Supp. 1551· S.D. Fla.· 1990-01-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the adverse interest exception bars the bank's defenses and counterclaims based on the misconduct of E.S.M. principals, and that the bank's counterclaims for attorneys' fees were improper.
• State v. Blackburn
  633 So. 2d 521· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-03-09 ·cited 10×
  The Department of Insurance, as Receiver of a failed insurance company (AGL), appealed the trial court's dismissal of its complaint against officers, directors, and related entities for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and civil theft. The appellate court reve
• Wiand v. Waxenberg
  611 F. Supp. 2d 1299· M.D. Fla.· 2009-03-19 ·cited 8×
  The court granted summary judgment for the defendant on constructive fraud claims for return of principal and on unjust enrichment claims for transfers from specific accounts, but denied summary judgment on other claims due to disputed issues of material fact.
• In re Spear & Jackson Sec. Litig.
  399 F. Supp. 2d 1350· S.D. Fla.· 2005-10-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged securities fraud against Crowley and Spear & Jackson, but not against Fletcher or Sherb & Co.
• Nerbonne, N.V. v. Lake Bryan Int'l Props.
  685 So. 2d 1029· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-01-10 ·cited 6×
  Nerbonne appealed a summary judgment dismissing its third-party fraud claims against Figueredo, Waters, and their corporations in a mortgage foreclosure action. The court reversed, holding that knowledge of the alleged fraud could not be imputed to Nerbonne from its agents who we
• O'Halloran v. Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP
  969 So. 2d 1039· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-05-04 ·cited 4×
  A bankruptcy trustee appealed the trial court's dismissal of claims against PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) for professional malpractice and other torts arising from PWC's advisory services to a bankrupt company. The appellate court reversed, holding that the claims were preserved i
• Dehres LLC v. Underwriters at Interest at Lloyds London
  826 F. Supp. 2d 1338· S.D. Fla.· 2011-11-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the actions of Mr. Havens, the sole shareholder and principal officer of Worth Jewelers, are imputed to the corporation, barring the consignors' recovery under the excess insurance policy.
• Lemano Invs., LLC v. RGF Athena, LLC
  390 So. 3d 154· Fla. 3d DCA· 2024-04-03
  Lemano Investments appeals summary judgment in favor of RGF Athena in a property ownership dispute. The court affirmed, holding that RGF Athena had superior title to two Miami properties that were fraudulently transferred by Frederic Henry, a manager of both companies, without au
• Solar Eclipse Inv. Fund III, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-08-10
  The court adopts the magistrate judge's report and denies the motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiffs adequately alleged their claim for aiding and abetting conversion.
• Wilson v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Duval County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-01-20
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas petition was untimely and equitable tolling was not warranted because the attorney's misadvice, while negligent, did not rise to the level of abandonment or extraordinary circumstance required for tolling.
• Vyas v. Polsinelli, PC
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-05-18
  The court held that the defendants' motion to dismiss should be denied because the in pari delicto defense was not apparent from the face of the complaint and the negligent misrepresentation claim met the pleading standards.
• Pearson v. Deutsche Bank AG
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-03-29
  The court held that the in pari delicto defense and aiding and abetting claims could not be dismissed at the pleading stage due to disputed facts and sufficient allegations of knowledge and assistance, respectively.
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Wavedivision Holdings, LLC
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2011-10-31
  The court granted summary judgment for the defendants, finding that their actions in causing Millennium to refinance its debt instead of selling assets to Wave were justified as a means of protecting their financial interests. The court also found that the plaintiffs failed to es
• Brandon v. MedPartners, Inc.
  892 F. Supp. 676· S.D. Fla.· 2001-09-20
  The court held that the arbitration provisions of the agreement, incorporating AAA rules, grant arbitrators the authority to decide arbitrability, including the anticipatory breach claim.
• Brandt v. Steel Hector & Davis
  213 B.R. 406· S.D. Fla.· 1997-08-01
  The court held that the statute of limitations barred the trustee's claims because the knowledge of the bank's officers and directors was imputed to the trustee, and no exceptions applied.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Shrader & York
  991 F.2d 216· 5th Cir.· 1993-05-20
  The court held that the FDIC's legal malpractice claims were time-barred because the knowledge of the controlling shareholder, Adams, was imputed to the corporations, and the discovery rule did not apply. The FDIC's status as receiver did not grant it special protection from impu
• Walter v. Holiday Inns, Inc.
  985 F.2d 1232· 3d Cir.· 1993-02-16
  The court held that even if a fiduciary duty existed, the plaintiffs failed to prove that the alleged omissions or misrepresentations were material to their decision to sell their partnership interest, given their sophistication and access to information.
• Home Ins. Co. v. Elliott Dunn and Thomas Davis and Julie Lundquist
  963 F.2d 1023· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-13
  A material misrepresentation on an insurance application, made with intent to deceive or that materially affects the risk, voids the entire policy under Illinois law, even if innocent insureds are unaware of the misrepresentation.