Diversity Jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1332)

661 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 931 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Wis. Elec. Power Co. v. Zallea Bros., Inc.
  606 F.2d 697· 7th Cir.· 1979-09-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the manufacturer of expansion joints was not liable for damages caused by stress corrosion cracking due to unknown contaminants in the buyer's steam, as there was no express or implied warranty, no defective design, and no failure to warn under the circumstanc
• Martin v. THE Maint. Co., Inc.
  588 F.2d 355· 2d Cir.· 1978-12-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the City's contract with Mainco, interpreted under evolving New York law, allowed the City to seek indemnity from Mainco even though the City was also found negligent.
• Carothers v. W. Transp. Co.
  554 F.2d 799· 7th Cir.· 1977-04-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' action to recover surcharge revenue was not barred by the statute of limitations for 'orders for the payment of money' and was properly brought under a provision for enforcing ICC orders other than for payment of money, and that the grievance p
• Coastal Plains Feeders, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co.
  545 F.2d 448· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instructions adequately conveyed the plaintiff's burden to prove theft and disprove mysterious disappearance, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings of theft and damages. The court also affirmed the dismissal of tort claims for bad
• COX v. N. Va. Transp. Comm'n
  551 F.2d 555· 4th Cir.· 1976-11-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that discharging a public employee based on public accusations of dishonesty or immorality without providing a name-clearing hearing violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• The Home Indem. Co. v. Moore
  499 F.2d 1202· 8th Cir.· 1974-06-13 ·cited 8×
  The court clarified that its prior opinion did not broadly narrow the right to interpleader relief, but affirmed the denial based on the existence of an adequate remedy in another court.
• Kausch v. The First Wichita Nat'l Bank OF Wichita Falls
  470 F.2d 1068· 5th Cir.· 1972-11-28 ·cited 8×·via Probate Exception To Diversity Jurisdiction
  Federal courts lack jurisdiction over will contests, even with diversity, unless state law allows an independent action to annul a will.
• Steel v. Downs
  438 F.2d 310· 8th Cir.· 1971-01-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict, as the evidence presented controversial issues of fact, including gross negligence, that were properly for the jury to decide.
• Madge Schultz v. Wayland Schultz
  436 F.2d 635· 7th Cir.· 1971-01-12 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  Service of process on an attorney with a broad power of attorney, but not specifically authorized to accept service, is insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction over the defendant.
• Hoffman v. George E. Lenyo, M.D.
  433 F.2d 657· 3d Cir.· 1970-11-05 ·cited 8×·via Manufactured Diversity Jurisdiction
  A defendant cannot seek dismissal of a federal diversity action for manufactured jurisdiction if they simultaneously seek to bar the state court action via statute of limitations defenses.
• Euge v. Trantina
  422 F.2d 1070· 8th Cir.· 1970-03-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to establish the requisite amount in controversy for federal jurisdiction.
• Fay Young and Forrest Young v. That WAS THE Week That WAS
  423 F.2d 265· 6th Cir.· 1970-03-06 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The right of privacy lapses upon the death of the person who enjoyed it, and descendants cannot recover for invasion of privacy after the person's death.
• Krentz v. Union Carbide Corp. & Worthington Corp.
  365 F.2d 113· 6th Cir.· 1966-08-01 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the decedent was a loaned employee of Union Carbide, making workmen's compensation the exclusive remedy, and that Worthington was not negligent in the design or warning regarding its compressor.
• United Nuclear Corp. v. Moki OIL & Rare Metals Co.
  364 F.2d 568· 10th Cir.· 1966-07-25 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the trial court did not err in finding that the principal place of business of United Nuclear Corporation was not in New Mexico, thus establishing diversity jurisdiction.
• Underwriters AT Lloyd's & Orion Ins. Co., Ltd. v. Nichols
  363 F.2d 357· 8th Cir.· 1966-06-30 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the interpleader action for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the insurers were exposed to potential multiple liability under Rule 22.
• Sherrill v. McSHAN
  356 F.2d 607· 9th Cir.· 1966-02-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the lands in question were located in California, not Arizona.
• Indem. Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. The First Nat'l Bank AT Winter Park
  351 F.2d 519· 5th Cir.· 1965-09-21 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that there was no actual controversy between the insurer and its insured bank, thus no diversity jurisdiction existed, and the case must be dismissed.
• Martens v. Lyman G. Winder
  341 F.2d 197· 9th Cir.· 1965-02-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the complaint for lack of in personam jurisdiction over the defendant, as service was not effected in accordance with applicable federal and state rules for non-resident defendants.
• In re Leeds Homes, Inc. v. Nat'l Acceptance Co. of Am.
  332 F.2d 648· 6th Cir.· 1964-06-09 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  A contract entered into by a non-qualifying foreign corporation is not void under Tennessee law, and therefore a claim arising from such a contract is allowable in a federal bankruptcy proceeding.
• John M. Peters Constr. Co. v. Marmar Corp.
  329 F.2d 421· 6th Cir.· 1964-03-31 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint to cure defective allegations of jurisdiction.
• Carroll W. Britton v. Green
  325 F.2d 377· 10th Cir.· 1963-11-29 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that a receiver could be appointed for the mortgaged property under the second claim, as the mortgage expressly allowed it, and absent co-tenants were not indispensable parties to that specific relief. However, a receiver could not be appointed under the first clai
• Panama Transp. Co. v. Greenberg
  290 F.2d 125· 1st Cir.· 1961-05-05 ·cited 8×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the plaintiff attorney's own testimony established that the amount in controversy was less than the jurisdictional minimum, requiring dismissal for lack of federal jurisdiction.
• Hirsch v. Hon. Walter Bruchhausen
  284 F.2d 783· 2d Cir.· 1960-11-29 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the district court improperly allowed an amendment to relate back to the original filing date, thereby validating service on the partners that would have been invalid in state court.
• Peerless Cas. Co. v. Mountain States Mut. Cas. Co.
  283 F.2d 268· 9th Cir.· 1960-09-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court correctly interpreted the reinsurance contract, finding no evidence that the parties intended to change the method of adjusting provisional premiums to include losses from excess policies when Exhibit C was adopted.
• Biggs v. Pub. Serv. Coordinated Transp.
  280 F.2d 311· 3d Cir.· 1960-07-05 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that an ex parte opening of the record to admit a certificate of citizenship was harmless error when the facts were already admitted, and that the jury's findings on negligence and the judge's conduct were not grounds for reversal.
• Brown v. Keller
  274 F.2d 779· 6th Cir.· 1960-02-08 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that adding a policyholder as a party plaintiff cured any defect in the original plaintiffs' capacity to sue and did not destroy diversity jurisdiction.
• Mfrs. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Arapahoe Drilling Co.
  267 F.2d 5· 10th Cir.· 1959-05-12 ·cited 8×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the vacated summary judgment on the counterclaim was not appealable as a final judgment because the counterclaim's relief was dependent on the main case's outcome, which was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
• Lewis Food Co. OF Cal. v. Milwaukee Ins. Co.
  257 F.2d 525· 9th Cir.· 1958-06-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its factual findings regarding the scope of insurance coverage and property valuation, nor in refusing to award interest when the undisputed amount due was timely tendered.
• Alberty v. W. Sur. Co.
  249 F.2d 537· 10th Cir.· 1957-11-07 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the plaintiff's two claims against the surety could be aggregated to meet the amount in controversy requirement for federal jurisdiction, and that alleged pleading defects were either cured by other allegations or were correctable by amendment.
• Frieda Rader and Paul Rader v. Mfrs. Cas. Ins. Co. OF Philadelphia
  242 F.2d 419· 2d Cir.· 1957-03-05 ·cited 8×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1332(A)
  The appellate court held that the District Court should have dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, not on res judicata grounds, because indispensable parties destroyed diversity jurisdiction.
• Pacific Freight Lines and Sidney S. Russell v. United States
  239 F.2d 191· 9th Cir.· 1956-12-14 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the driver's actions constituted a departure from the scope of his employment, and thus the United States was not liable for the collision. The court also noted a jurisdictional defect regarding the judgment against the individual driver.
• Cooper v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
  234 F.2d 170· 1st Cir.· 1956-05-24 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the rewritten Count V of the substitute complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action in deceit, and that Count VIII was similarly viable.
• Pasos v. PAN Am. Airways, Inc.
  229 F.2d 271· 2d Cir.· 1956-01-23 ·cited 8×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the federal district court lacked jurisdiction over a suit for trespass on foreign land, even if a state statute allowed such an action, and that the merits of the case involved invalidating foreign government acts.
• Verda Ross Whalen v. Phoenix Indem. Co.
  220 F.2d 78· 5th Cir.· 1955-03-11 ·cited 8×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict for the plaintiff under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, reversing the judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• The Gameweel Co. v. The City OF Phoenix
  216 F.2d 928· 9th Cir.· 1954-11-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the contract was void due to non-compliance with competitive bidding requirements and that the trial court's findings were not clearly erroneous.
• Nat'l Postal Transp. Ass'n v. Hudson
  216 F.2d 193· 8th Cir.· 1954-10-27 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the trial court did not err in submitting the question of accidental death to the jury, but did err in awarding an attorney's fee under a Kansas statute that did not apply to fraternal benefit societies.
• Murarka v. Bachrack Bros., Inc.
  215 F.2d 547· 2d Cir.· 1954-08-03 ·cited 8×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the plaintiffs' loss of profits on resale constituted general damages recoverable under New York law when there was no available market for the goods, and the defendant's resale price could not be used to calculate damages. The court also affirmed the lower co
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Mossey
  195 F.2d 56· 7th Cir.· 1952-01-30 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that an insurer may bring a declaratory judgment action to void a policy procured by material misrepresentation, even if the loss has occurred, and that the denial of a jury trial was proper as the action was equitable.
• Standard Accident Ins. Co. v. Terrell
  180 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1950-02-18 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the admission of expert testimony based on inadmissible hearsay was prejudicial error requiring reversal.
• Updike v. West
  172 F.2d 663· 10th Cir.· 1949-02-07 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to remand because the petition for removal sufficiently alleged fraudulent joinder of separable causes of action, justifying federal jurisdiction.
• Turner v. Alton Banking & Tr. Co.
  166 F.2d 305· 8th Cir.· 1948-02-27 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  A defendant may assert a counterclaim against a foreign executor suing individually on a judgment, but the alleged misconduct in selling estate assets at a low price, if approved by the probate court, cannot be collaterally attacked in a separate action under Illinois law.
• Steele v. Guar. Tr. Co. of N.Y.
  164 F.2d 387· 2d Cir.· 1947-12-08 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction over claims not meeting the jurisdictional amount or diversity requirements.
• Miller v. City OF Greenville
  138 F.2d 712· 8th Cir.· 1943-11-04 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The federal court should not exercise jurisdiction over a dispute concerning state taxation of a bridge, as there is no substantial federal question and adequate state remedies exist.
• Thomson v. Butler
  136 F.2d 644· 8th Cir.· 1943-06-09 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  Federal courts lack jurisdiction over a suit to annul a state court's will judgment based on alleged fraud or lack of service, as these issues do not present a federal question or meet diversity requirements.
• People OF State OF Ill. v. Md. Cas. Co.
  132 F.2d 850· 7th Cir.· 1942-12-09 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  State officers are not liable for failing to furnish safe drinking water because their duty was public, not individual, and the third-party defendants' actions destroyed diversity jurisdiction.
• Bloomfield Vill. Drain Dist. v. Keefe
  119 F.2d 157· 6th Cir.· 1941-03-14 ·cited 8×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that while federal courts have jurisdiction, drain districts are not corporations for jurisdictional purposes, and that state court judgments declaring drain projects illegal are res judicata, preventing estoppel by bond recitals against the districts.
• AMT Title Servs. of Tex., LLC v. TAG Agro, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-04 ·cited 7×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to properly allege the citizenship of the parties, specifically the limited liability companies involved.
• Hensley v. Westin Hotel
  113 F.4th 1327· 11th Cir.· 2024-09-04 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court was divested of subject matter jurisdiction when an indispensable party, Hartford, intervened and destroyed complete diversity of citizenship, requiring vacatur of the summary judgment.
• Foley v. Asima Azam
  257 So. 3d 1134· Fla. 5th DCA· 2018-10-19 ·cited 7×
  Section 1367(d) tolls the statute of limitations for state law claims dismissed from federal court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, regardless of whether the federal claims were frivolous or lacked plausible foundation. The plain text of the statute does not condition tol
• Sunrise Mills (MLP) Ltd. P'ship v. Adams
  688 So. 2d 464· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-03-05 ·cited 7×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  In this personal injury case, the court granted certiorari to review a trial court's order sustaining plaintiff's objection to a request for admission regarding the amount of damages sought. The court held that defendant had a statutory right to discovery concerning the amount in