Conversion (Implied)

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

• The Republic OF the Philippines v. Ferdinand E. Marcos
  806 F.2d 344· 2d Cir.· 1986-11-26 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the district court properly granted a preliminary injunction because there was sufficient evidence to support probable ownership by the Marcoses and federal question jurisdiction existed due to the foreign policy implications of the case.
• Haas v. Jefferson Nat'l Bank OF Miami Beach
  442 F.2d 394· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-22 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding Charles H. Glueck an indispensable party and dismissing the action for lack of complete diversity.
• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Kearney Tr. Co.
  151 F.2d 720· 8th Cir.· 1945-10-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant bank, by accepting checks payable to itself and crediting them to the personal account of the drawer's president without inquiry, failed to meet the duty of care required under federal law, and thus could not claim estoppel.
• Am. Enka Co. v. Wicaco Mach. Corp.
  686 F.2d 1050· 3d Cir.· 1982-08-16 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the value of lost bailed goods should be assessed at the time of demand, not the time of bailment, and that the case should be remanded for reconsideration of pre-judgment interest.
• Burnham v. Todd
  139 F.2d 338· 5th Cir.· 1943-12-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a bankruptcy trustee can pursue a summary proceeding to recover property wrongfully taken from the court's custody, even if the property has been converted to money, and that laches and limitations do not bar recovery for a well-concealed fraud.
• Domenick Falconi v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  257 F.2d 287· 3d Cir.· 1958-06-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a plaintiff who knowingly participates in an illegal check kiting scheme cannot recover for losses arising from that scheme, even if the funds were ultimately used by a bank.
• Shomaker v. Waters
  59 Fla. 414· Fla.· 1910-01-01 ·cited 12×
  A cotton merchant sued to enforce a mortgage lien on crops grown on his debtor's wife's farm, but the Florida Supreme Court held that a husband cannot mortgage crops grown on his wife's separate property without her written consent, as required by the state constitution protectin
• J & H Flyer Inc. v. Pa. R.R. Co.
  316 F.2d 203· 2d Cir.· 1963-04-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a carrier is not liable as an insurer for the loss of merchandise not disclosed as baggage, and that the plaintiff's salesman was contributorily negligent by leaving the valuable bag unattended.
• W. Assur. Co. v. Genesee Valley Tr. Co.
  171 F.2d 664· 2d Cir.· 1948-12-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove the defendant bank had actual or constructive knowledge that the deposited funds were trust funds, and thus the bank was entitled to appropriate them for the agency's debt.
• Edina State Bank v. MR. Steak, Inc.
  487 F.2d 640· 10th Cir.· 1973-09-14 ·cited 2×
  A restriction on stock transfer is ineffective against a pledgee who lacks actual knowledge of it, even if the issuer believes the stock was purchased for investment, if the restriction is not conspicuously noted on the certificate as required by UCC § 8-204.
• Fid. & Deposit Co. of Md. v. Union Tr. Co. of Rochester
  129 F.2d 1006· 2d Cir.· 1942-07-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the bank was liable for collecting a draft with a forged endorsement but not for drafts endorsed by real persons using aliases.
• Yates v. Commercial Bank & Tr. Co.
  432 So. 2d 725· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-06-07 ·cited 1×
  The estate of Marion Cahill sued Commercial Bank & Trust Company for paying an ambiguous check written by its personal representative, Emmett McDonald, in the amount of $10,075 (numerals) versus $1,075 (written words). The court reversed the trial court's dismissal, holding the b
• Johnson v. Landsman
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-05-10
  The court held that the amended complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and dismissed it with leave to amend, while denying the motion to compel arbitration without prejudice.
• ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. & Lewis Bus. Forms of P.R., Inc. v. Caguas Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Puerto RICO
  867 F.2d 707· 1st Cir.· 1989-02-02
  A collecting bank is liable without negligence to the payee of a check bearing an unauthorized endorsement, but the payee's own negligence can be a defense if it is the sole cause of the loss.
• Robb v. Universal Constructors, Inc.
  665 F.2d 998· 10th Cir.· 1981-12-08
  New Mexico law precludes recovery for loss of use of totally destroyed property, but Colorado law allows for moratory interest on wrongfully withheld funds.
• Kahn Eng'g Co., Inc. v. Am. Sec. & Tr. Co.
  263 F.2d 485· D.C. Cir.· 1958-12-11
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case because it did not prove it was the named payee of the check.
• Barnes v. Kan. City Off. of Fed. Bureau of Investigation
  185 F.2d 409· 8th Cir.· 1950-12-20
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the petition for a declaratory judgment because there was no clear need for such relief and other adequate remedies were available.
• Bank of Dunnellon v. Marlow
  100 Fla. 227· Fla.· 1930-07-22
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment against Bank of Dunnellon for refusing to pay a check deposited for collection. The court held that when a bank exercises due diligence in collecting a deposited check according to established banking procedures and receives final pay