Diversity Of Citizenship

615 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 389 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Brown v. Pearl River Valley Water Supply Dist.
  292 F.2d 395· 5th Cir.· 1961-06-30 ·cited 4×
  The federal court should abstain from exercising jurisdiction and dismiss the case, allowing state courts to address the issues, particularly when state law interpretation and injunctive relief are involved.
• Grooms v. Greyhound Corp.
  287 F.2d 95· 6th Cir.· 1961-02-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended petition correcting a misnomer related back to the original filing date, thus commencing the action within the statute of limitations.
• Pavlovscak v. Lewis
  274 F.2d 523· 3d Cir.· 1959-09-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prior decision regarding the suability and service of process for the United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund was correct, despite a modification in the legal rationale by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
• Spencer v. Woody
  212 F.2d 668· 4th Cir.· 1954-04-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the District Court had jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship because the plaintiffs had established domicile in the District of Columbia.
• Travelers Ins. Co. v. Rowand
  197 F.2d 283· 5th Cir.· 1952-06-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury's finding of total and permanent disability due to cancer caused by a traumatic injury was supported by substantial evidence, even if medical science was uncertain about the exact causation.
• Milan v. Kausch
  194 F.2d 263· 6th Cir.· 1952-02-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the insurer, as a foreign corporation, could not prosecute a subrogation claim under Michigan law, and that the employer's claim lacked the jurisdictional amount because recovery was limited to compensation actually paid.
• Palomas Land & Cattle Co. v. Baldwin
  189 F.2d 936· 9th Cir.· 1951-05-29 ·cited 4×
  A trustee is entitled to maintain an interpleader action, and the court did not err in allowing attorneys' fees and costs.
• Furrow v. Koutsky-Brennan-Vana Co.
  182 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1950-05-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that retailers who paid overceiling prices in a blackmarketing conspiracy are in pari delicto with the wholesaler and cannot recover the full amounts paid, except for those who received no lumber.
• Fennell v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  177 F.2d 737· 5th Cir.· 1949-11-18 ·cited 4×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that federal jurisdiction was lacking because the amount in controversy did not exceed $3,000, and therefore the appeal must be dismissed.
• Knobloch v. M. W. Kellogg Co.
  154 F.2d 45· 5th Cir.· 1946-03-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a foreign corporation's designation of an agent for service of process in Texas does not constitute consent to venue for transitory actions that did not arise in Texas or relate to business conducted there.
• Fechheimer Bros. Co. v. Barnwasser
  146 F.2d 974· 6th Cir.· 1945-01-22 ·cited 4×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that individual claims against numerous defendants cannot be aggregated to meet the federal jurisdictional amount requirement in diversity cases.
• Wall v. Brim
  145 F.2d 492· 5th Cir.· 1944-11-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the amendment did not introduce a new cause of action barred by the statute of limitations and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict on diversity and consent.
• First English Lutheran Church of Okla. City v. Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Kansas and Adjacent States
  135 F.2d 701· 10th Cir.· 1943-05-12 ·cited 4×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  A civil court cannot exercise equitable jurisdiction to protect a property right if the plaintiff has no legal or beneficial interest in that property.
• Thames v. State OF Miss. for Use & Benefit of Shoemaker
  117 F.2d 949· 5th Cir.· 1941-02-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the administrator, suing on an official bond for wrongful death, was a nominal party whose citizenship did not establish federal diversity jurisdiction when the real beneficiaries were citizens of the same state as the defendant.
• Gen. Petroleum Corp. of Cal. v. Dougherty
  117 F.2d 529· 9th Cir.· 1941-01-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's claim of lien priority was not supported, as Dougherty's consistent assertion of his royalty rights, despite variations in pleading, was known to appellant, and appellant could not claim to be misled.
• Lindsey v. Progressive Am. Ins. Co.
  2022 WL 17487990· M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-07 ·cited 3×
  The court struck plaintiff's disclosure statement for failing to properly identify his citizenship as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 and Local Rule 3.03. The plaintiff stated only that he resides in Florida, which the court found insufficient; citizenship must be
• Leslie v. Carnival Corp.
  22 So. 3d 567· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-11-25 ·cited 3×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court, in a concurring opinion, addresses the dissent's arguments regarding the enforceability of a forum-selection clause in cruise ship passenger contracts. The concurrence clarifies that the federal Savings to Suitors Clause does not create an enforceable state court right
• Simon Holdings PLC Grp. of Cos. U.K. v. Klenz
  878 F. Supp. 210· M.D. Fla.· 1995-02-02 ·cited 3×
  A foreign-chartered corporation with its principal place of business in the United States is considered both an alien and a citizen of that state for diversity jurisdiction purposes, thus destroying complete diversity when suing or being sued by another alien.
• Basil Georges v. Glick
  856 F.2d 971· 7th Cir.· 1988-09-14 ·cited 3×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the probate exception, as the suit did not interfere with state probate proceedings.
• Helen T. Steel (Muff) v. United States & Dean E. Steel
  813 F.2d 1545· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-07 ·cited 3×
  The court held that Dean Steel had sufficient minimum contacts with California to establish personal jurisdiction for the declaratory judgment action, but that the United States is immune from suit under FUSFSPA.
• Bonavire v. Wampler
  779 F.2d 1011· 4th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that there was ample evidence to support the jury's verdict finding the defendants guilty of defrauding the plaintiffs and awarding damages.
• Rossi v. Best Resume Serv., Inc.
  497 F. Supp. 437· S.D. Fla.· 1980-09-11 ·cited 3×
  A petition for removal that fails to allege the principal place of business of a corporate party may be amended after the expiration of the thirty-day removal period if the omission is a technical defect, not a missing essential allegation.
• Frith v. Blazon-Flexible Flyer, Inc.
  512 F.2d 899· 5th Cir.· 1975-05-08 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a district court judge cannot issue an injunction that contradicts a prior, unreviewable remand order by another judge in the same court.
• Stern v. S. Chester Tube Co.
  378 F.2d 205· 3d Cir.· 1967-05-25 ·cited 3×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  Federal courts cannot issue a writ of mandamus in an original proceeding, even if diversity jurisdiction exists, as such writs must be in aid of existing jurisdiction.
• Elbert v. Lumberman's Mut. Cas. Co.
  201 F.2d 500· 5th Cir.· 1953-01-29 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the action, reversing the judgment.
• Gladden v. Stockard S. S. Co. (Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc.
  184 F.2d 510· 3d Cir.· 1950-10-05 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiff had no cause of action against the employer under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, and that the district court lacked jurisdiction due to lack of diversity.
• Euclid Turnaround Opportunity Fund LP v. Amerant Equip. Fin.
  2020 WL 6472615· S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, finding subject-matter jurisdiction exists based on diversity of citizenship and affirming orders compelling discovery.
• Busalacchi v. Guhl
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-13 ·cited 2×·via Complete Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the defendants failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus diversity jurisdiction was lacking.
• Leon v. First Liberty Ins.
  308 F. Supp. 2d 236· M.D. Fla.· 2012-11-06 ·cited 2×·via Complete Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the defendant met its burden to establish diversity jurisdiction, as the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 and complete diversity of citizenship existed.
• Fontainebleau Gardens Condo. Ass'n v. Pac. Ins.
  768 F. Supp. 2d 1271· S.D. Fla.· 2011-04-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's motion to join non-diverse defendants and remand the case to state court is denied because the claims against the proposed defendants were either not viable under state law or were premature.
• Wiesenberg v. Costa Crociere
  35 So. 3d 910· Fla. 3d DCA· 2010-02-24 ·cited 2×
  Wiesenberg sued Costa Crociere for personal injuries sustained as a cruise ship passenger. The trial court dismissed based on res judicata, but the appellate court reversed that reasoning and affirmed the dismissal on the alternative ground that the forum selection clause in the
• United States v. Gaines
  125 F. Supp. 758· S.D. Fla.· 1997-09-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's statements were voluntarily made after a valid waiver of his Miranda rights, and therefore are admissible into evidence.
• Am's. Best Inns, Inc. v. Best Inns OF Abilene, L.P.
  980 F.2d 1072· 7th Cir.· 1992-11-17 ·cited 2×·via Complete Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the parties failed to establish complete diversity of citizenship, requiring dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
• Stanley v. Amoco OIL Co.
  965 F.2d 203· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-26 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment, finding no triable issue of fact regarding the defendant's liability.
• Action Orthopedics, Inc. v. Techmedica, Inc.
  759 F. Supp. 1566· M.D. Fla.· 1991-03-11 ·cited 2×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that attorney fees awarded under Florida common law for inequitable conduct are considered 'costs' and thus cannot be included in the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction. However, the court found that the plaintiff's tort claim, involving additional de
• Buckley v. Control Data Corp.
  923 F.2d 96· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it lacks federal subject matter jurisdiction due to a lack of complete diversity of citizenship, as the citizenship of a limited partnership is determined by the citizenship of all its partners.
• Northbrook Excess & Surplus Ins. Co. v. The Med. Malpractice Joint Underwriting Ass'n OF Mass.
  900 F.2d 476· 1st Cir.· 1990-04-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.2 cannot be used to create diversity jurisdiction when an unincorporated association has jural status under state law. Therefore, the plaintiff could not amend its complaint to sue the association's members as a class.
• Jones v. Harold W. Griffith, M.D.
  870 F.2d 1363· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 2×·via Complete Diversity Of Citizenship
  A federal district court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to issue preliminary determinations under the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act because such determinations are advisory opinions and do not constitute a case or controversy ripe for federal adjudication.
• Nat'l Patent Dev. Corp. v. T.J. Smith & Nephew
  865 F.2d 353· D.C. Cir.· 1989-01-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that 35 U.S.C. § 293, as written, should be interpreted to allow suits concerning patent ownership, and that prior precedent Neidhart v. Neidhart S.A. was wrongly decided.
• Rowland v. Donald A. Patterson, M.D.
  852 F.2d 108· 4th Cir.· 1988-07-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that for diversity jurisdiction purposes, an action is commenced on the date the federal complaint is filed, not when a state administrative claim is filed, even if the administrative filing tolls the statute of limitations.
• Soghanalian v. Soghanalian
  693 F. Supp. 1091· S.D. Fla.· 1988-06-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that diversity jurisdiction exists because the defendant's domicile is in New York, and even if he holds dual citizenship, his Lebanese citizenship would not be recognized for diversity purposes. The court also found the counter-counterclaim to be compulsory.
• Gamble v. Gen. Foods Corp.
  846 F.2d 51· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-09 ·cited 2×
  The Ninth Circuit held that the presence of Doe defendants, who were not dismissed, destroys diversity jurisdiction, requiring remand to state court, even if the case proceeded to judgment in federal court.
• Kiick v. Metro. Edison Co.
  784 F.2d 490· 3d Cir.· 1986-02-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that subject matter jurisdiction under the Price-Anderson Act's grant for extraordinary nuclear occurrences requires a prior determination by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and that claims do not "arise under" the Act for federal jurisdiction purposes if
• Weller v. Navigator Marine, Inc.
  737 F.2d 1547· 11th Cir.· 1984-08-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the motion to realign parties, as their true interests were aligned with the plaintiff, destroying complete diversity.
• Vincent v. DeMaria Porsche-Audi, Inc.
  532 F. Supp. 1035· S.D. Fla.· 1982-03-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that removal was improper because the defendant corporation was a citizen of the forum state, and the claims were not separate and independent, nor did the corporation's dissolution alter this.
• Reynolds v. Stevens Studios & L. B. Stevens Co., Inc.
  659 F.2d 44· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-14 ·cited 2×
  An oral employment contract for a period exceeding one year is unenforceable under the Texas Statute of Frauds, and promissory estoppel does not apply unless there is a promise to reduce the agreement to writing and egregious circumstances.
• Sligh v. DOE
  596 F.2d 1169· 4th Cir.· 1979-04-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's determination of diversity of citizenship was not clearly erroneous, and thus affirmed the judgment.
• Wheel Horse Sales, Inc. v. Spence
  566 F.2d 679· 10th Cir.· 1977-11-30 ·cited 2×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  A defendant's admission of partial liability does not defeat federal diversity jurisdiction if the amount claimed by the plaintiff in good faith exceeds the jurisdictional minimum.
• Broglie v. MacKAY-Smith
  541 F.2d 453· 4th Cir.· 1976-09-17 ·cited 2×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged an amount in controversy to establish federal jurisdiction, even if some damages accrued after filing.
• Hruska v. Severance Specialty, Inc.
  498 F.2d 796· 6th Cir.· 1974-06-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant had probable cause as a matter of law to detain the plaintiff and initiate prosecution, and therefore the District Court erred in not directing a verdict for the defendant.