Aggrieved Party

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

• Schlothan v. Territory OF Alaska
  276 F.2d 806· 9th Cir.· 1960-02-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Alaska tax lien statute, which grants priority to tax liens over other encumbrances regardless of whether the taxed activity occurred on the encumbered property, does not violate the Due Process or Equal Protection clauses of the Constitution, nor does it
• Isbrandtsen Co., Inc. v. United States & Fed. Mar. Bd.
  239 F.2d 933· D.C. Cir.· 1956-11-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the dual rate contracts, which penalize shippers for using other carriers, are proscribed by Section 14, Third of the Shipping Act of 1916 as discriminating or unfair methods.
• AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Cunningham
  224 F.2d 478· 5th Cir.· 1955-07-15 ·cited 8×
  A party aggrieved by a judgment, even if favorable, has a right to appeal if the judgment quality differs from what was claimed. The court affirmed the district court's findings that the defendant's financial representations were not fraudulent, despite discrepancies.
• Downing v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  203 F.2d 611· D.C. Cir.· 1953-03-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to review the SEC's order approving a reorganization plan under Section 24(a) when the SEC has not yet applied to a district court for enforcement of the plan. The court also held that the SEC cannot condition its approval to avoid appellat
• Okin v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  143 F.2d 945· 2d Cir.· 1944-07-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a minority shareholder has standing to seek review of a loan refinancing order when the corporation, from which the shareholder derives rights, was a moving party in securing the order.
• Save the Homosassa River Alliance, Inc. v. Citrus Cnty.
  2 So. 3d 329· Fla. 5th DCA· 2008-10-24 ·cited 7×
  Environmental and property owner plaintiffs challenged Citrus County's approval of a resort development as inconsistent with the county's comprehensive plan. The trial court dismissed for lack of standing, but the Fifth District reversed, holding that under Florida's liberalized
• Haun v. Don Mealy Imports, Inc.
  285 F. Supp. 2d 1297· M.D. Fla.· 2003-10-06 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state claims for actual or statutory damages under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and dismissed claims under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) due to insufficient pleading of harm and lack of a private right
• Save Anna Maria, Inc. v. Dep't OF Transp. & Dep't of Env't Prot.
  700 So. 2d 113· Fla. 2d DCA· 1997-10-08 ·cited 7×
  The Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the Department of Environmental Protection's denial of a dredge and fill permit for a bridge project over Sarasota Pass, finding that the applicant (Department of Transportation) failed to provide reasonable assurance that wate
• Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Wood
  662 So. 2d 417· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-11-08 ·cited 7×
  The Third District Court of Appeal reversed a writ of prohibition that prevented the Board of County Commissioners from reviewing a zoning decision appealed by the Lakes By The Bay Community Council. The court held that the Board has the right to make an initial determination of
• Am. Fed'n OF Gov't Emps., AFL-CIO v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth.
  960 F.2d 176· D.C. Cir.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) correctly determined that an employee's grievance was barred by 5 U.S.C. § 7116(d) because an unfair labor practice (ULP) charge addressing the same issue had been filed previously by the union.
• Crown Pontiac, Inc. v. Bell
  547 So. 2d 290· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-08-04 ·cited 6×
  Crown Pontiac appealed a trial court order granting its own motion for a new trial after a jury verdict favored the Bells on fraud claims. The appellate court dismissed the appeal, holding that a party cannot appeal an order granting a new trial when seeking to challenge prior ad
• Sierra Club v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n
  825 F.2d 1356· 9th Cir.· 1987-08-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the petition because it was filed prematurely and not within the statutory 60-day period after the final agency order.
• United States v. Little JOE Trawlers, Inc.
  780 F.2d 158· 1st Cir.· 1986-01-02 ·cited 6×
  Appellants, seamen whose in rem action against a vessel was dismissed, lack standing to appeal an order for disbursement of the vessel's sale proceeds from a subsequent government action.
• Ass'n Against Discrimination IN Emp., Inc. v. City OF Bridgeport
  710 F.2d 69· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court had the power to modify its prior injunction to adapt remedies to changed circumstances, and that the modification was justified and consistent with prior rulings.
• Bankamerica Corp. v. Bd. OF Governors OF the Fed. Reserve Sys.
  596 F.2d 1368· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-14 ·cited 6×
  The Court held that the district court had jurisdiction to hear the case, but reversed the decision that the application was granted by operation of law, finding the ninety-one day period had not expired.
• Council FOR Emp. & Econ. Energy USE v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  575 F.2d 311· 1st Cir.· 1978-05-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the FCC's ruling allowing broadcasters discretion in providing free reply time under the fairness doctrine, even when the recipient might be able to pay, was not unreasonable, unconstitutional, or illegal.
• Braddy v. S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co.
  458 F.2d 666· 5th Cir.· 1972-01-11 ·cited 6×
  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) does not become a party to a private Title VII lawsuit and therefore lacks the standing to file post-judgment motions or appeal court orders.
• In re Sunningdale Country Club v. Gosline
  351 F.2d 139· 6th Cir.· 1965-10-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the District Court correctly denied the motion to compel the Referee to issue a certificate for review because the issues were moot, the appellants were not aggrieved parties, and their petition for review was not filed in compliance with local rules.
• Hunt OIL Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  306 F.2d 878· 5th Cir.· 1962-08-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the FPC order because the petitioners had not been adversely affected by it.
• Lynchburg GAS Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  284 F.2d 756· 3d Cir.· 1960-11-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Lynchburg Gas Company could not seek immediate review of the Federal Power Commission's order denying intervention, as the order was not final and could be reviewed upon appeal from the final order after the Commission granted intervention on rehearing. Furthe
• Int'l Union OF Elec., Radio & Mach. Workers, AFL-CIO v. United States & Atomic Energy Comm'n
  280 F.2d 645· D.C. Cir.· 1960-06-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Atomic Energy Commission's provisional construction permit because it was not a final order. The court also found that the intervenor's potential future injury was not sufficiently immediate or certain to establish standing
• City OF Corinth v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  268 F.2d 10· 5th Cir.· 1959-06-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review an interlocutory order of the Federal Power Commission that allowed a rate increase to take effect subject to refund.
• United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  203 F.2d 78· 5th Cir.· 1953-03-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Federal Power Commission's order dismissing a petition for declaratory relief was not a reviewable order because the petitioner was not aggrieved.
• In re van Sweringen Corp. v. Leckie
  180 F.2d 119· 6th Cir.· 1950-02-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a petitioner must be aggrieved and have standing to appeal, and that a district court is not bound by a Special Master's recommendations on fees, only findings of fact unless clearly erroneous.
• Gilbert v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  146 F.2d 513· 7th Cir.· 1944-12-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that petitioners were not 'aggrieved' parties under § 24(a) of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, and therefore the court lacked jurisdiction to review the Securities and Exchange Commission's interlocutory orders approving a reorganization plan.
• Cohan v. Elder et ux.
  118 F.2d 850· 9th Cir.· 1941-03-26 ·cited 6×
  A farmer debtor who has had a composition and extension proposal confirmed may still amend their petition to be adjudicated bankrupt under subsection s if they feel aggrieved by the plan.
• Krueger v. Acme Fruit Co.
  129 Fla. 107· Fla.· 1936-12-31 ·cited 6×
  Trueman Fertilizer Company sought to intervene in a creditors' bill action filed by the Kruegers against Acme Fruit Company. The trial court dismissed the complaint without acting on the intervention petition, and the Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that a petition to int
• Cobb Cnty. Sch. Dist.
  111 F.4th 1312· 11th Cir.· 2024-08-13 ·cited 5×
  The Eleventh Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the Cobb County School District, having lost its party status, lacked standing to appeal the preliminary injunction as a nonparty amicus curiae.
• Law Off. of Michael B. Brehne, PA v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  268 So. 3d 854· Fla. 5th DCA· 2019-03-15 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court affirmed a summary judgment for insurance companies, holding they did not impair a law firm's charging lien by disbursing settlement funds to the client's new attorney, as the funds were held in trust. This decision clarifies that a lien is not impaired if the
• Dep't of Revenue v. Calixto Manuel Lopez
  252 So. 3d 823· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-08-01 ·cited 5×
  A party lacking standing cannot appeal an administrative order when the party obtained a wholly favorable judgment and is not adversely affected by any provision of the order.
• In re Baker
  680 F.2d 721· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-25 ·cited 5×
  A possibility of prosecution in a foreign country is insufficient to grant immunity from testifying, and a witness's belief of unlawful surveillance must be more than a mere assertion to trigger statutory obligations.
• MacHella v. Cardenas
  659 F.2d 650· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-19 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the appellant lacked standing to appeal the denial of adding Ms. Shaw as a plaintiff because Ms. Shaw herself did not appeal and the appellant showed no injury from the denial.
• Kimberly Regenesis, LLC v. Lee Cnty.
  64 F.4th 1253· 11th Cir.· 2023-04-10 ·cited 4×
  The county and commissioner cannot appeal the denial of quasi-judicial immunity because the county lacks appellate standing and the commissioner was not a party to the case and did not participate in the district court proceedings.
• Lani Moore v. Dist. OF Columbia
  886 F.2d 335· D.C. Cir.· 1989-06-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Education of the Handicapped Act, as amended, allows for the award of attorneys' fees to parents who prevail in administrative proceedings.
• Packard Elevator v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  808 F.2d 654· 8th Cir.· 1986-12-24 ·cited 4×
  A party seeking judicial review of an administrative agency decision must have participated in the agency proceedings, and IBEW failed to demonstrate such participation.
• Milton v. State
  453 So. 2d 137· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-07-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the assessment of investigation expenses was proper, the order of restitution was invalid without prior notice and an opportunity to be heard.
• S. Broward Hosp. Dist. v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs. of the State of Fla.
  385 So. 2d 1094· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-06-18 ·cited 4×
  An unsuccessful applicant for a certificate of need has standing to request review of a competing applicant's approval if the applications are mutually exclusive, but denial of a writ of prohibition is appropriate where factual questions exist as to whether mutual exclusivity exi
• Gen. Motors Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  607 F.2d 330· 10th Cir.· 1979-10-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's orders were not final and therefore not ripe for judicial review because they were part of ongoing hearings on a gas curtailment plan.
• Garnet L. Fuller v. Branch Cnty. Rd. Comm'n
  520 F.2d 307· 6th Cir.· 1975-07-23 ·cited 4×
  A party who is not aggrieved by an order, particularly one resulting from a consent decree, cannot appeal that order. The plaintiff, having no legal interest in the dismissed third-party complaint at the time of dismissal and not being a party to the original action against the r
• In re Am. Bonded Mortg. Co., Inc. v. Nicholas
  453 F.2d 528· 5th Cir.· 1971-12-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant, a stockholder, lacked standing to appeal the bankruptcy court's distribution orders and that the trustee's accounting was sufficient, as there was no equity for stockholders.
• In re Wells v. Bankruptcy
  403 F.2d 635· 6th Cir.· 1968-11-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the bankrupts and an unsecured creditor lack standing to appeal an order allowing another unsecured claim against the estate.
• Buchanan v. Jimenez
  155 So. 2d 724· Fla. 3d DCA· 1963-08-15 ·cited 4×
  The Court held that the trial court and state appellate court applied an improper constitutional standard in determining the admissibility of the petitioner's confession.
• Standard Accident Ins. Co. v. Lohman
  295 F.2d 261· 7th Cir.· 1961-09-29 ·cited 4×
  A plaintiff seeking recovery for a sheriff's false return of service cannot maintain a direct action under the Sheriff's Act if not a party to the original suit, nor can it sue as a partial subrogee without joining the insured party, which would destroy diversity jurisdiction.
• Clyde Stone and wife v. Huffstutler
  227 F.2d 217· 5th Cir.· 1955-11-25 ·cited 4×
  Individuals not parties to a bankruptcy proceeding lack standing to petition for review of a referee's order.
• Am. Drug Corp. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  149 F.2d 608· 8th Cir.· 1945-06-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to review the Federal Trade Commission's order vacating a prior cease and desist order, as the petitioner is aggrieved by the reopening and modification of the order.
• Am. Power & Light Co. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  143 F.2d 250· 1st Cir.· 1944-06-19 ·cited 4×
  A stockholder does not have independent standing to seek review of an administrative order directed solely at the corporation, even if the order may indirectly affect the stockholder's financial interests.
• State OF Cal. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  966 F.2d 1541· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 3×
  The court held that FERC did not err in reopening negotiations for stream flow recommendations and that its final stream flow determination was supported by substantial evidence. The court also found no undue Congressional influence on FERC's decisions.
• Univ. Cmty. Hosp. v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs.
  492 So. 2d 1339· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-07-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) abused its discretion in denying a certificate of need, entitling the University Community Hospital (UCH) to attorney's fees.
• In re Odom
  702 F.2d 962· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-14 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the debtor's consent alone is insufficient for a direct appeal to the court of appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 1293(b) when creditors with substantial adverse interests exist.
• The Dayton Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  246 F.2d 694· D.C. Cir.· 1957-06-03 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the petitioner, a retail gas distributor, lacked standing to challenge an FPC order because it was not directly aggrieved by the order.