Affirmative Defense Pleading

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

• Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n v. Maximo R. Trinidad
  358 So. 3d 754· Fla. 4th DCA· 2023-03-15 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's decision in a mortgage foreclosure case involving a lost note. The trial court had incorrectly applied collateral estoppel based on a prior judgment where the note was deemed unenforceable due to an invalid allonge, but this defense wa
• Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Kings Creek S. Condo, Inc.
  300 So. 3d 763· Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-03-18 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a directed verdict granted to an insured, finding the insurer was entitled to present evidence of non-wind related causes for roof damage under a "named perils" policy. The court clarified that an insurer does not need to plead a policy exclusion as a
• The Pub. Health Tr. OF Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Acanda
  71 So. 3d 782· Fla.· 2011-06-23 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that service of process on the Department of Financial Services (DFS) under section 768.28(7) is not a condition precedent or element of a negligence cause of action against a public hospital, and therefore cannot be used as grounds for a directed v
• Calero v. Metro. Dade Cnty.
  787 So. 2d 911· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-05-09 ·cited 4×
  Maria del Carmen Calero appealed the dismissal of her loss of consortium claim against Metropolitan Dade County for failing to provide statutory notice under section 768.28, Florida Statutes. The Third District affirmed the summary judgment, holding that separate notice of a cons
• Parvin Wright v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp.
  570 So. 2d 1130· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-12-11 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed summary judgment for General Motors Acceptance Corporation, certifying to the Florida Supreme Court the question of whether GMAC's statutory defense under Fla. Stat. § 324.021(9)(b) affects the rights of the motoring public.
• Ironman v. Rhoades
  493 So. 2d 1097· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-09-10 ·cited 4×
  David and Susan Ironman appealed a jury verdict finding that defendant Karen Rhoades was not negligent despite causing a rear-end accident injuring David. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court committed error by allowing defendant to introduce sudden brake fa
• Cornwall v. U.S. Constr. Mfg., Inc.
  800 F.2d 250· Fed. Cir.· 1986-09-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying the motion to amend the answer to include an affirmative defense of invalidity without providing a justifying reason or considering prejudice.
• Mills v. Dade Cnty.
  206 So. 2d 227· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-01-30 ·cited 4×
  Appellants challenged a Dade County Zoning Resolution as an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power and sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The lower court entered summary judgment for the county based on equitable estoppel, but the appellate court reversed because
• Jace Andrews v. McKim & Creed & Travelers Prop. Cas.
  355 So. 3d 957· Fla. 1st DCA· 2023-02-01 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court reversed a Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) decision that denied a claimant's request for a one-time change of physician. The court found that the claimant's right to select a physician was not waived by dismissing a prior petition or by the employer/carrier
• IVY Chase Apt. Prop. v. IVY Chase Apts.
  352 So. 3d 33· Fla. 2d DCA· 2022-06-29 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court reversed a foreclosure judgment, finding that the lender presented insufficient evidence to prove the amounts owed. The court also addressed the default interest rate, holding that the trial court erred by modifying the unambiguous terms of the note based on e
• Schoeck v. Allstate Ins. Co.
  235 So. 3d 953· Fla. 2d DCA· 2017-10-13 ·cited 3×
  Amanda Schoeck was injured in a 2009 accident and sought uninsured motorist (UM) benefits from her mother's Allstate policy while also covered under her father's Geico policy. The circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of Allstate, finding that Schoeck failed to satisfy
• DON Facciobene, Inc. v. Hough Roofing, Inc.
  225 So. 3d 323· Fla. 5th DCA· 2017-07-21 ·cited 3×
  Don Facciobene, Inc. (DFI), a general contractor, and Hough Roofing, Inc. (HRI), a roofing subcontractor, disputed payment for roofing work on a historic property. The trial court awarded HRI only partial payment based on a finding that the subcontract did not apply retroactively
• Sanabria v. Pennymac Mortg. Inv. Tr. Holdings I, LLC
  197 So. 3d 94· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-07-15 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed a foreclosure judgment because the trial court erroneously excluded evidence that the homeowners had adequately pleaded an affirmative defense challenging the authenticity of the homeowner's signature on the promissory note. Th
• BSP/Port Orange, LLC. v. Water Mill Props., Inc.
  969 So. 2d 1077· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-10-19 ·cited 3×
  The court held that failure to plead an affirmative defense, such as modification, prevents its consideration at summary judgment, but reversed the judgment against one appellant and corrected prejudgment interest.
• United States Cartridge Co. v. Powell
  186 F.2d 611· 8th Cir.· 1951-01-23 ·cited 3×
  The court held that its prior opinion should be modified to allow the defendant an opportunity to plead and present evidence regarding defenses under Section 2 of the Portal-to-Portal Act, as the Act was not in effect at the time of the original trial.
• NEW Horizons Condo. Master Ass'n, Inc. v. Harding
  336 So. 3d 796· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-02-23 ·cited 2×
  New Horizons Condominium Master Association appealed a summary judgment in favor of residents Robert Harding and Fifth Horizons Condominium regarding a disputed cable services budget allocation. The trial court invalidated a $248,000 budgetary allocation for Comcast services as u
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Complete Bus. Solutions Grp., Inc.
  2013 WL 6017329· S.D. Fla.· 2021-08-14 ·cited 2×
  The court granted in part and denied in part the SEC's motion, striking some affirmative defenses, construing others as denials, and granting leave to amend certain defenses.
• Ronal Builders, Inc. v. Powell Bros., Inc.
  328 So. 2d 869· Fla. 4th DCA· 1976-03-12 ·cited 2×
• Jules Sokoloff v. Corinto S.S. Co.
  225 So. 2d 554· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-08-05 ·cited 2×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed a summary judgment against a defendant who sought to avoid payment on a promissory note. The court found that written agreements excluded oral warranties and that failure of consideration was not properly raised.
• Vinson v. Rexrode
  404 F.2d 829· D.C. Cir.· 1968-10-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge erred in granting summary judgment because a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding the release of liability for estate taxes.
• Serge Phanord v. Martine Phanord
  411 So. 3d 568· Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-05-14 ·cited 1×
  A party need not file a written answer or plead affirmative defenses in response to a contempt motion under Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.615(b), and due process requires that a general magistrate adjudicate an equitable laches defense raised at a contempt hearing rathe
• 951 Harbor Drive, LLC v. SD Constr., LLC
  394 So. 3d 690· Fla. 3d DCA· 2024-06-19 ·cited 1×
  A defendant waives the affirmative defense of claim-splitting by failing to plead it in its responsive pleading, and summary judgment cannot be granted based on an affirmative defense raised for the first time in a motion for summary judgment. The substance of an affirmative defe
• Green Gables Apts. II, Ltd. v. AHG TAX Credit Fund Xviii, LLC
  374 So. 3d 866· Fla. 5th DCA· 2023-10-13 ·cited 1×
  A party that fails to plead avoidances to affirmative defenses in a reply waives the right to raise those avoidances on appeal.
• Nembhard v. Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.
  326 So. 3d 760· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-08-18 ·cited 1×
  An insurer may rescind an insurance policy based on material misrepresentation in the application, even if non-intentional, when the misrepresentation materially affects the risk or would have caused the insurer not to issue the policy had the true facts been known. Post-loss acc
• Danna Suarez and Rolando Suarez v. Wells Fargo Bank
  201 So. 3d 694· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-08-24 ·cited 1×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment of mortgage foreclosure because the lender, Wells Fargo, failed to present evidence refuting the borrowers' affirmative defense that Wells Fargo did not comply with the notice requirement of paragraph 22 of the mortg
• Straub v. Muir-Villas Homeowners Ass'n, Inc.
  128 So. 3d 885· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-12-18 ·cited 1×
  A property owner appeals a judgment requiring him to pay assessments on eight lots rather than three re-platted lots. The homeowners association cross-appeals the trial court's finding that the owner, as declarant, was not required to reimburse the association for master POA asse
• Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. v. Jackson
  1987 WL 61305· S.D. Fla.· 2013-01-29 ·cited 1×
  The court granted in part the motion to dismiss the counterclaim, finding insufficient factual allegations and causation, and granted in part the motion to strike affirmative defenses, treating some as denials and dismissing others with leave to replead.
• Hrubec v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp.
  981 F.2d 962· 7th Cir.· 1992-12-14 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the complaint stated a claim under 26 U.S.C. § 7431(a)(2) and that plaintiffs should have been allowed to amend their complaint.
• Charles Ermon Hamm et ux. v. City OF Milton
  358 So. 2d 121· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-05-04 ·cited 1×
  Mrs. Hamm sued the City of Milton for injuries sustained in an automobile collision, and her husband sued for derivative damages. The court affirmed the trial court's reduction of their jury verdict awards by applying comparative negligence to the husband's derivative claim and o
• Vogue Optical Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Nat'l van Lines, Inc.
  339 So. 2d 676· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-11-16 ·cited 1×
  Vogue Optical Manufacturing appealed a trial court decision denying its negligent bailment damages claim against National Van Lines, a freight carrier. The trial court had ruled that Vogue failed to satisfy conditions precedent to recovery—namely, providing written notice of loss
• Manuel v. Feijoo, M.D., P.A.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-10-22
  Submission to an examination under oath is a condition precedent to receipt of PIP benefits under section 627.736(6)(g), and prejudice is not an element of the insurer's affirmative defense for non-compliance.
• U.S. All Star Fed'n, Inc. v. Open Cheer & Dance Championship Series, LLC
  11th Cir.· 2026-06-24
  The dismissal with prejudice of an affirmative defense challenging a mark's distinctiveness does not preclude the defendant from raising distinctiveness at summary judgment, because distinctiveness is an element of the plaintiff's prima facie case, not a true affirmative defense.
• Exotropin, LLC v. DP Derm, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-01-05
  The court granted in part and denied in part motions to strike affirmative defenses, treating some as denials, striking others as improper defenses, and allowing some to proceed.
• Rani Bolton v. Inland Fresh Seafood Corp. of Am., Inc.
  11th Cir.· 2025-10-15
  Employees of Inland Fresh Seafood Corporation brought claims under ERISA alleging that company fiduciaries breached their duties by causing the employee stock ownership plan to overpay for company stock, but failed to exhaust the plan's internal administrative remedies before fil
• Abeling v. WK Ent., LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-05-14
  A complaint need not anticipate and negate affirmative defenses unless the defense is apparent on its face; the plaintiff's allegations here did not admit all elements of the FLSA administrative exemption.
• Volpe v. VMSB, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-03-28
  Restaurant servers and other employees sued for unpaid overtime wages, breach of contract based on service charge distribution practices, and unlawful confiscation of tips; the court granted summary judgment for the employer, finding that the employees qualified for a Fair Labor
• Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-07-02
  The court held that the claimant's statement of claims sufficiently alleged notice of dangerous conditions and that the claims for vicarious liability, negligent training, and negligent entrustment were not duplicative, thus denying the motion to dismiss. The court also denied th
• Sieberg-Shabbick v. Shabbick
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2024-04-24
  In this dissolution of marriage case, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's final judgment in all respects but reversed the trial court's award of a set-off for rental value of the marital home to the Former Husband, holding that set-off is an affirmative
• MSP Recovery Claims Series 44, LLC v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-08-11
  The court held that affirmative defenses must provide fair notice of the grounds on which they rest and are insufficient if they are bare-bones or invalid as a matter of law.
• Advanced Fla. Med. Grp. v. Progressive Am. Ins. Co.
  Fla. 6th DCA· 2023-05-26
  The appellate court reversed a summary judgment for the insurance company, finding it was improperly granted on an affirmative defense that was not adequately pled. The court emphasized the importance of specificity in pleading affirmative defenses.
• Interactive Content Engines, LLC v. Rumble USA, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-05-08
  The court held that the defendants' affirmative defenses were not insufficient as a matter of law and their counterclaims sufficiently stated a claim, thus denying the plaintiff's motion to strike and dismiss.
• Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n v. Maximo R. Trinidad and Theresa A. Trinidad
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2023-03-15
  A trial court errs in relying on collateral estoppel to prevent enforcement of a lost note when the defending party failed to plead the affirmative defense and it was not tried by implied consent, and even if it had been, applying collateral estoppel would be manifestly unjust be
• R. B. v. B. T.
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2023-01-13
  The appellate court reversed a lower court's decision denying a father's petition to modify child support. The lower court improperly relied on an "unclean hands" defense that was not raised by the mother, and failed to address several issues and stipulations presented by the par
• Delgado v. Carnival Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-11-04
  The court held that "failure to state a claim" is not a valid affirmative defense and that other affirmative defenses were insufficiently pled as conclusory shotgun pleadings, requiring them to be stricken without prejudice.
• Fin. Designs, Inc. v. Evanston Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-10-21
  The court held that some affirmative defenses were improperly pled as they constituted general denials or lacked sufficient factual support, while others based on policy exclusions were properly pled as affirmative defenses.
• Quintana v. People's Tr. Ins. Co.
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2022-03-09
  This case involves a homeowners' insurance dispute where the appellate court reversed a lower court's dismissal. The appellate court found that the lower court improperly considered an affirmative defense of accord and satisfaction on a motion to dismiss, as the supporting allega
• Colella v. Novartis Pharms. Corp.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-01-04
  The court held that a defendant's motion for certification for interlocutory appeal should be denied because the issue presented was not a controlling question of law with substantial grounds for difference of opinion, and immediate appeal would not materially advance the litigat
• Wight v. Bluman
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-07-02
  The court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiffs' motion to strike affirmative defenses, ordering a more definite statement for one defense and treating two others as denials.
• N. Hannoush Jewelers, Inc. v. Bly
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2021-06-30
  This case concerns whether unemployment compensation benefits should be offset against temporary partial disability (TPD) benefits in a workers' compensation appeal. The court affirmed the Judge of Compensation Claims' (JCC) order, clarifying that unemployment benefits are primar
• Christ v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co. Americas
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-03-12
  The appellate court reversed a foreclosure judgment, finding the bank failed to prove it complied with the mortgage's notice requirements. The court held that the bank's evidence of mailing a default notice was insufficient, as it relied on an employee's assumption rather than di