Aggrieved Party

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

• In re First Colonial Corp. OF Am. v. Franz J. Baddock
  544 F.2d 1291· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-10 ·cited 129×
  The court held that the bankruptcy judge and district court abused their discretion by failing to apply proper standards and procedures in awarding attorneys' fees, and that American Benefit had standing to appeal.
• Libby v. City Nat'l Bank
  592 F.2d 504· 9th Cir.· 1978-11-28 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction for the interpleader action and vacated that judgment. It also found that certain suppliers' claims did not meet the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction. The court reversed the finding of breach of contract a
• Dickinson v. Segal
  219 So. 2d 435· Fla.· 1969-02-19 ·cited 84×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a trial court lacks authority to permit a stranger to the record to intervene "for purposes of appeal" after entry of a final judgment. The Comptroller sought to intervene in a mandamus proceeding challenging a trial court's finding that a tax
• Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  236 F.2d 785· 5th Cir.· 1956-06-30 ·cited 83×
• Graniteville Co. (sibley Division) v. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n
  438 F.2d 32· 4th Cir.· 1971-02-05 ·cited 79×
  The court held that a hearing to determine the factual basis and relevance of a charge to an EEOC demand for evidence is proper when the charge is vague and challenged.
• Nat'l Coal Ass'n v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  191 F.2d 462· D.C. Cir.· 1951-06-18 ·cited 58×
  The court held that petitioners, representing coal mine owners, operators, and railroad employees, were sufficiently 'aggrieved' by the Federal Power Commission's order to have standing to seek judicial review, as their economic interests in competing fuel markets were directly a
• Fla. Welding & Erection Serv., Inc. v. Am. Mut. Ins. Co. OF Boston
  285 So. 2d 386· Fla.· 1973-11-07 ·cited 53×
  Florida Welding & Erection Service challenged the constitutionality of Florida's insurance rating statutes, arguing they constituted an unlawful delegation of legislative power and violated due process and equal protection. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the statutes as constit
• United States v. Lynch
  699 F.2d 839· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-03 ·cited 52×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the defendant's conviction for mail fraud and conspiracy, and that the district court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or restitution calculation.
• Theo. Hirsch Co. v. Paul R. Scott for McDonald Furniture Co.
  87 Fla. 336· Fla.· 1924-04-04 ·cited 52×
  The Florida Supreme Court denied a receiver's motion to dismiss an appeal from orders fixing his compensation, holding that orders determining receiver compensation are final and appealable even when entered after a final consent decree, and that the debtor-defendant has standing
• Citizens Comm. FOR the Hudson Valley v. Volpe
  425 F.2d 97· 2d Cir.· 1970-04-16 ·cited 48×
  The court held that plaintiffs had standing to challenge the Army Corps of Engineers' permit issuance under the Administrative Procedure Act, and that the permit was void as it exceeded the Corps' statutory authority under the Rivers and Harbors Act.
• In re Michigan-Ohio BLDG. Corp. Fellheimer v. Townsend
  117 F.2d 191· 7th Cir.· 1941-02-06 ·cited 48×
  Stockholders who are not directly, immediately, or substantially aggrieved by a court order lack standing to appeal that order, even if it might indirectly affect the value of their stock.
• Westborough Mall, Inc. v. City OF Cape Girardeau
  693 F.2d 733· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-12 ·cited 47×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the city deprived developers of zoning rights without due process and whether city officials conspired with private developers to restrain trade.
• Simmons v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  716 F.2d 40· D.C. Cir.· 1983-08-23 ·cited 45×
  A party seeking direct review of an agency order under the Hobbs Act must have participated in the agency proceedings to be considered 'aggrieved'; an intervenor cannot cure a lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
• Battaglia Fruit Co. v. The City OF Maitland
  530 So. 2d 940· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-07-21 ·cited 36×
  Battaglia Fruit Company appealed a circuit court decision that quashed the Orange County Board of County Commissioners' approval of its rezoning application. The appellate court reversed, holding that the circuit court lacked authority to grant certiorari relief to parties who fa
• Koniag, Inc. v. Andrus
  580 F.2d 601· D.C. Cir.· 1978-04-28 ·cited 36×
  Administrative standing should be determined by the functions of the agency and whether a participant contributes to those functions, rather than by judicial standing doctrines.
• In re the Witness Charles G. Berry
  521 F.2d 179· 10th Cir.· 1975-08-01 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the witness's claims of Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and attorney-client privilege were without merit and that the subpoena duces tecum was valid and not overly broad.
• Med. Comm. FOR Human Rights v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  D.D.C.· 1970-07-08 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the SEC's decision regarding the shareholder's proxy proposal is reviewable by the court and that the petition for review was timely filed.
• Metro. Television Co. v. United States
  221 F.2d 879· D.C. Cir.· 1955-04-14 ·cited 36×
  The court held that allegations of potential financial injury from broadcast interference are sufficient to qualify a party as 'aggrieved' and entitle them to a hearing under § 309(c) of the Communications Act.
• Margienell S. Fischer v. Brock Adams
  572 F.2d 406· 1st Cir.· 1978-05-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a district court may award attorneys' fees for work done at the administrative level once a party has successfully appealed an adverse administrative determination to that court.
• United States v. Allsenberrie
  424 F.2d 1209· 7th Cir.· 1970-04-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a defendant charged with possession of seized goods has standing to challenge the legality of the search, and that the affidavit supporting the search warrant was constitutionally sufficient.
• The Easton Utils. Comm'n v. Atomic Energy Comm'n & United States
  424 F.2d 847· D.C. Cir.· 1970-02-10 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the Atomic Energy Commission properly denied Easton Utilities Commission's petitions to intervene and for reconsideration because they were untimely and lacked good cause, and Easton failed to establish a legal basis for late entry.
• W.L. Gieger v. SUN First Nat'l Bank OF Orlando
  427 So. 2d 815· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-03-09 ·cited 31×
  Sun Bank obtained a garnishment order against J. Nolan Carter to collect a judgment against the Giegers by attaching Carter's obligation under a promissory note. The court reversed, holding that future installments on a negotiable promissory note cannot be garnished while the not
• Marcial Ucin, S.A. v. SS Galicia
  723 F.2d 994· 1st Cir.· 1983-12-14 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, holding that Iberbroker waived its personal jurisdiction defense, was liable for discharge costs under the charter party, and that the district court did not err in allowing amendments or entering default against Perez.
• Texaco, Inc. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  317 F.2d 796· 10th Cir.· 1963-05-20 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Commission's summary rejection of contracts containing indefinite price-changing clauses without a hearing lacked statutory authorization and deprived companies of their right to a hearing and judicial review. Order No. 242 was declared void.
• United States ex rel. Chapman v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  191 F.2d 796· 4th Cir.· 1951-10-01 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the petitioners (Secretary of the Interior and a cooperative association) lacked standing to challenge the Federal Power Commission's order granting a license, and even if they had standing, the order was valid.
• Holton v. H.J. Wilson Co., Inc.
  482 So. 2d 341· Fla.· 1986-01-30 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court clarifies the timing requirements for a defendant to appeal a judgment exonerating a codefendant. A codefendant must timely appeal the exonerating judgment within thirty days—not wait until they suffer an adverse judgment—when the exoneration affects con
• Int'l Union v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  373 F.2d 671· D.C. Cir.· 1967-01-25 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the Union's claim for a compensatory remedy was not frivolous and that the forum where the Union first filed its petition for review should be respected.
• United States v. Sleight
  808 F.2d 1012· 3d Cir.· 1987-01-12 ·cited 28×
  The court held that restitution ordered as a condition of probation under the Federal Probation Act may be based on the court's factual findings of loss, not solely on amounts alleged in the indictment, and that postjudgment interest is permissible, but prejudgment interest is no
• United States v. Gallup
  812 F.2d 1271· 10th Cir.· 1987-02-27 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy to defraud the United States and influencing HUD transactions, and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or evidentiary rulings.
• City OF Willcox & Ariz. Elec. Power Coop., Inc. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  567 F.2d 394· D.C. Cir.· 1977-06-30 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Federal Power Commission did not err in refusing to sua sponte fashion a compensation plan for pipeline customers affected by curtailment, absent a definite plan offered or agreed to by the parties.
• Spinetti v. Atl. Richfield Co.
  522 F.2d 1401· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1975-08-18 ·cited 26×
  The court held that appeals from interlocutory orders denying preliminary injunctions in private actions arising under the Economic Stabilization Act and Allocation Act require certification by the district court, and absent such certification, this court lacks jurisdiction.
• Louisville GAS & Elec. Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  129 F.2d 126· 6th Cir.· 1942-06-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the petitioner's challenge to the first two orders was untimely, as no rehearing was sought and the time for review had expired. The third order, requiring disallowed costs to be charged to surplus, was affirmed as within the Commission's authority.
• Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. A.B.
  29 F.4th 1299· 11th Cir.· 2022-03-29 ·cited 24×
  A tort claimant does not have appellate standing to appeal a declaratory judgment that an insurer has no duty to defend its insured, as such a judgment does not injure the claimant.
• Nery S. Cuba and Tomas Rafael Llamas-Almaguer v. State
  362 So. 2d 29· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-07-11 ·cited 24×
  Multiple defendants appealed convictions for lottery-related offenses, challenging the denial of motions to suppress evidence obtained through wiretap orders. The court affirmed all convictions, holding that the wiretap orders were properly issued by a neutral magistrate with suf
• Rivas v. Prof'l Prot. & Investigations Agency, Inc.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2023-03-22 ·cited 22×
  A non-party to the lower tribunal proceedings lacks standing to appeal an order entered by that tribunal.
• MacIas v. HBC OF Fla., Inc.
  694 So. 2d 88· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-04-23 ·cited 22×
  A plaintiff must be an aggrieved party and suffer actual losses to bring a claim under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA).
• Pub. Serv. Co. OF NEW Mexico v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  557 F.2d 227· 10th Cir.· 1977-06-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the contract did not grant PNM the right to unilaterally file for a rate increase, and that Gallup's petition challenging the Commission's burden of proof standard was premature.
• Woodring v. United States
  367 F.2d 968· 10th Cir.· 1966-10-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the admission of a co-conspirator's post-conspiracy statements was prejudicial error, requiring reversal. However, the appellant lacked standing to challenge the search of a box belonging to another co-conspirator.
• Pub. Serv. Comm'n of the State of N.Y. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  284 F.2d 200· D.C. Cir.· 1960-04-28 ·cited 22×
  A party seeking intervention before the Federal Power Commission must petition for review of the order denying intervention within the statutory period; they cannot wait to challenge the denial in a petition for review of the final order on the merits.
• Natural GAS Pipeline Co. OF Am. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  253 F.2d 3· 3d Cir.· 1958-02-26 ·cited 22×
  A unilateral filing of a new rate by a natural gas producer cannot annul the rate established by contract between the parties, even if the producer believes it is an improvident bargain.
• Mitchell v. Covington Mills, Inc.
  229 F.2d 506· D.C. Cir.· 1955-12-01 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge believes the Walsh-Healey Act establishes a wage standard based on the contractor's community, not a nationwide standard.
• Patent Scaffolding Co., Inc. v. Upright, Inc.
  194 F.2d 457· 9th Cir.· 1952-01-31 ·cited 22×
  A party who has obtained a judgment in their favor cannot appeal to seek a determination on issues not necessary to support that judgment, particularly when the issue of patent validity has become moot due to a finding of non-infringement.
• State Rd. Dep't of the State of Fla. v. Zetrouer
  105 Fla. 650· Fla.· 1932-06-08 ·cited 22×
  The State Road Department sought review of a condemnation judgment awarding $4,725 plus attorney's fees to landowner Zetrouer. The Florida Supreme Court held that a condemnor may appeal a judgment in its favor when challenging its excessiveness, and need not deposit the award int
• Water Transp. Ass'n v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  819 F.2d 1189· D.C. Cir.· 1987-06-05 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the Water Transport Association (WTA) lacked standing to challenge the Interstate Commerce Commission's public disclosure of rail-rate contract terms because WTA's interests were not arguably within the zone of interests protected by the Staggers Rail Act.
• Wolfe v. City of Miami
  114 Fla. 238· Fla.· 1934-03-09 ·cited 21×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a plaintiff who obtained a new trial cannot pursue a cross-writ of error to challenge trial court rulings that allegedly caused the jury's initial verdict against her, because she is not an "aggrieved party" under the statute permitting writs o
• Watson v. State
  579 So. 2d 900· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-05-29 ·cited 20×
  The court held that restitution to a victim's mother for expenses beyond the victim's direct medical and mental health costs is improper, as it extends the definition of 'aggrieved party' beyond statutory limits.
• Hoover v. Switlik Parachute Co.
  663 F.2d 964· 9th Cir.· 1981-12-14 ·cited 20×
  Depositions taken before a party's joinder can be considered as affidavits in support of a summary judgment motion, but summary judgment was improperly granted because genuine issues of material fact were raised.
• Transcon. GAS Pipe Line Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  589 F.2d 186· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the petition for review was not premature, and the condition imposed by the Commission was reasonable and supported by the public convenience and necessity.
• State of Fla. ex rel. Robert L. Shevin v. Kerwin
  279 So. 2d 836· Fla.· 1973-06-27 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Attorney General has standing to appeal a trial court's declaration that a state statute is unconstitutional, even if the Attorney General was not a party in the trial court. The Court established that the Attorney General, as chief legal o
• The Gov't OF Guam v. Fed. Mar. Comm'n & United States
  329 F.2d 251· D.C. Cir.· 1964-01-23 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Government of Guam has standing to petition for review and affirmed the Commission's order in part, but remanded for further findings on the allocation of administrative overhead and the determination of working capital.