Erie Doctrine

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

• Havoco OF Am., Inc. v. Hilco, Inc.
  799 F.2d 349· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while Havoco had knowledge of the fraud when it assigned the contract, the record does not establish as a matter of law that Havoco waived its claims for fraud and misrepresentation by doing so.
• Greta Ellen Hauser v. Pub. Serv. Co. OF Colo.
  797 F.2d 876· 10th Cir.· 1986-07-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its jury instructions on the highest degree of care, denying a directed verdict, or failing to declare a mistrial, but did err in failing to reduce the judgment by the amount paid by a settling tortfeasor.
• Joachim v. AT & T Info. Sys.
  793 F.2d 113· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-30 ·cited 8×
  An employee handbook does not create contractual rights altering at-will employment status in Texas absent an express reciprocal agreement.
• Page v. Gulf OIL Corp.
  775 F.2d 1311· 5th Cir.· 1985-11-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Louisiana Oilfield Indemnity Act applies to the blanket agreement because it was not executed before the Act's effective date, and that the summary judgment for the defendant was improper due to unresolved factual issues.
• Cost Bros., Inc. v. The Travelers Indem. Co.
  760 F.2d 58· 3d Cir.· 1985-04-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a surety's right to a stay pending arbitration is governed by state surety law, not federal law, even when the underlying contract involves interstate commerce.
• Davis v. Nat'l Gypsum Co.
  743 F.2d 1132· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while Colorado substantive law applies, Mississippi's procedural statute of limitations governs the action.
• Kenney v. Lewis Revels Rare Coins, Inc.
  741 F.2d 378· 11th Cir.· 1984-09-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the negligence of a co-employee driver cannot be imputed to a passenger co-employee under a joint venture theory when the relationship arises solely from their employment. The court also held that a party cannot assign error to jury instructions without making
• Home Life Ins. Co. v. Equitable Equip. Co., Inc.
  694 F.2d 402· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-15 ·cited 8×
  In a diversity case, state law governs the calculation of prejudgment and postjudgment interest, including the rate, from the date of judicial demand.
• Wally Fischer v. Iowa Mold Tooling Co., Inc.
  690 F.2d 155· 8th Cir.· 1982-10-15 ·cited 8×
  In a diversity case, commencement of an action for the purpose of applying a state statute of limitations is governed by state law, not Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3.
• Slaughter v. Pa. X-Ray Corp. & John J. Geiger v. Delco Gen. Truck Sales Co., Inc.
  638 F.2d 639· 3d Cir.· 1981-01-15 ·cited 8×
  A "loan receipt" arrangement between joint tortfeasors to fund a settlement is valid and not a prohibited settlement payment, and a comparative negligence statute does not apply retroactively to torts committed before its effective date.
• In re Transystems, Inc. v. Bankruptcy
  569 F.2d 1364· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the advance was a capital contribution, not a loan, and affirmed the lower court's decision based on the 'clearly erroneous' standard of review.
• Clayton v. Burston
  493 F.2d 429· 5th Cir.· 1974-05-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions on the presumption of negligence were erroneous under Texas law, affecting the defendant's substantial rights.
• Kaminer v. The Franklin Life Ins. Co.
  472 F.2d 1073· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-12 ·cited 8×
  A life insurance policy is not effective if not delivered and accepted during the insured's lifetime and continued insurability, and waiver/estoppel cannot create coverage where no contract existed.
• Peterson v. Allcity Ins. Co.
  472 F.2d 71· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the insurer's failure to settle the claim in good faith subjected it to excess liability, and the jury's award of damages was justified.
• Santovenia v. Confederation Life Ass'n
  460 F.2d 805· 5th Cir.· 1972-05-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a life insurance policy issued in Cuba, payable in Cuban pesos in Havana, is governed by Cuban law, and thus beneficiaries cannot recover in U.S. dollars in Florida absent proof of inability to perform in Cuba.
• Raritan Trucking Corp. v. Aero Commander, Inc.
  458 F.2d 1106· 3d Cir.· 1972-04-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence presented a prima facie case for negligence, warranting submission to the jury, but that strict liability in tort was not applicable to a service provider in this context.
• Kuklis v. Hancock
  428 F.2d 608· 5th Cir.· 1970-06-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the blood alcohol test results were admissible and that the trial court did not err in rejecting the defenses of contributory negligence and assumption of the risk.
• Schewe v. Bentsen
  424 F.2d 60· 5th Cir.· 1970-04-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that parol evidence cannot be used to vary the terms of a deed when those terms are unambiguous, and a conveyance 'subject to' a mortgage does not impose personal liability on the grantee.
• McPHERSON v. ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.
  350 F.2d 563· 5th Cir.· 1965-07-20 ·cited 8×
  A significant delay in providing notice to an insurer, even if due to ignorance of coverage, constitutes a breach of the insurance contract and relieves the insurer of its duty to defend or indemnify.
• Am. CAN Co. v. Horlamus Corp.
  341 F.2d 730· 5th Cir.· 1965-02-23 ·cited 8×
  A manufacturer's limitation of liability clause in a contract with a direct buyer is binding on an ultimate consumer, and a release executed by the direct buyer can absolve the manufacturer of liability to the ultimate consumer if agency or privity issues are resolved in favor of
• Smoot v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  337 F.2d 223· 5th Cir.· 1964-10-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that there was no accord and satisfaction as a matter of law because there was no express or implied condition of payment. The trial court erred in not directing a verdict for the judgment creditors.
• Mrs. Mary Virginia Bell v. TUG Shrike
  332 F.2d 330· 4th Cir.· 1964-05-13 ·cited 8×
  A federal court sitting in admiralty must apply state law to determine beneficiaries under the Jones Act when no established maritime rule exists, and a bigamous marriage does not create a lawful widow under Virginia law.
• Md. Cas. Co. v. Hallatt
  326 F.2d 275· 5th Cir.· 1964-01-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that its prior decision misapplied Florida law, and it should conform to a subsequent Florida appellate court decision that adopted the dissenting view.
• Mut. Int'l Exp. Co. v. Napco Indus., Inc.
  316 F.2d 393· D.C. Cir.· 1963-03-07 ·cited 8×
• Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Dial
  314 F.2d 33· 5th Cir.· 1963-03-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a store owner's negligent failure to inspect and keep its floor free from debris is sufficient to support a judgment for a business invitee injured by such debris.
• Yoder v. Nutrena Mills, Inc.
  294 F.2d 505· 8th Cir.· 1961-09-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that parol evidence is inadmissible to contradict or vary the terms of written contracts when the alleged condition precedent is addressed within the contract itself, thus affirming the summary judgment.
• Mrs. Virginia Kelly v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co.
  294 F.2d 400· 5th Cir.· 1961-08-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims for wrongful death could be aggregated to meet the jurisdictional amount because they sought to enforce a single right of action.
• Hardware Dealers Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Smart
  293 F.2d 558· 10th Cir.· 1961-07-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the jury's finding that the plaintiff's building was destroyed by windstorm, despite the presence of high water, and that the plaintiff was entitled to attorney fees under Kansas law.
• City OF Albertville v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co.
  272 F.2d 594· 5th Cir.· 1959-12-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the contractor assumed the risk of delay due to unforeseen difficulties, and the trial court erred in not granting the defendant's motion for a directed verdict.
• Seaboard AIR Line R.R. Co. v. Sarasota-Fruitville Drainage Dist.
  251 F.2d 583· 5th Cir.· 1958-01-14 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge holds that the Drainage District lacked the statutory authority to enter into an indemnity agreement and that the agreement constituted a revocable license, not an easement.
• Drinan v. A. J. Lindemann & Hoverson Co.
  238 F.2d 72· 7th Cir.· 1956-11-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Wisconsin two-year statute of limitations for wrongful death actions applies to all such actions, regardless of where the death occurred, to promote uniformity and equal treatment of litigants.
• Schultz v. Palmer Welloct Tool Corp.
  207 F.2d 652· 3d Cir.· 1953-10-06 ·cited 8×
  A broker cannot recover a commission for selling a manufacturing plant in Pennsylvania if they were not licensed as a real estate broker in Pennsylvania at the time of the transaction, even if the sale involved a going business.
• In re Mut. Life Ins. Co. of N.Y.
  188 F.2d 424· 5th Cir.· 1951-04-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district judge did not err in refusing to enter a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and that a new jury trial is appropriate.
• Hous. Opportunities Project v. SPV Realty, LC
  212 So. 3d 419· Fla. 3d DCA· 2016-12-21 ·cited 7×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal held that private claimants must exhaust administrative remedies by filing a complaint with the Florida Commission on Human Relations and allowing 180 days for conciliation before filing a civil action under the Florida Fair Housing Act. The c
• W. Am. Ins. v. Band & Desenberg
  925 F. Supp. 758· M.D. Fla.· 1996-05-03 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the absolute pollution exclusion in the insurance policy was unambiguous and barred coverage for the employees' sick building syndrome claims, as the dispersal of contaminants into the building's air constituted a release of pollutants.
• Lambert v. Kysar
  983 F.2d 1110· 1st Cir.· 1993-01-13 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the forum selection clause in the contract was valid and enforceable, requiring the lawsuit to be brought in Clark County, Washington.
• Davis v. Jellico Cmty. Hosp. Inc.
  912 F.2d 129· 6th Cir.· 1990-08-23 ·cited 7×
  A plaintiff's death after a final judgment does not warrant a new trial or relief from judgment under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59 or 60(b).
• Ageloff v. DELTA Airlines Inc.
  860 F.2d 379· 11th Cir.· 1988-11-18 ·cited 7×
  The court certified questions regarding the calculation of "net accumulations" under the Florida Wrongful Death Act to the Florida Supreme Court and reversed the award of expert witness fees exceeding statutory limits.
• Theodore R. Bledsoe, M.D. v. Crowley
  849 F.2d 639· D.C. Cir.· 1988-06-10 ·cited 7×
  The court's concurrence suggests that the law of the jurisdiction where medical services are provided is generally preferable in choice-of-law analysis for medical malpractice cases due to systemic interests in consistent policy and patient access to care.
• Nichols v. Anderson
  837 F.2d 1372· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-25 ·cited 7×
  The court held that an invalid radius-exclusion clause in an insurance policy voids the clause only to the extent necessary to meet public policy, making the insurer liable for the statutory minimum coverage, not the full policy limit. The court also affirmed that supplementary p
• In re Proceedings By Merrill Lynch Relocation Mgmt. v. Merrill Lynch Relocation Mgmt., Inc.
  812 F.2d 1116· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-12 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the Oregon statute making an attorney liable for the costs of a nonresident plaintiff is substantive law applicable in federal diversity actions and that the contempt order against the attorney was proper.
• Mardirosian v. Lincoln Nat'l Life Ins. Co.
  739 F.2d 474· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-03 ·cited 7×
  The court held that an insurer does not have a duty to notify the owner of a life insurance policy of a prospective lapse when the policy application directed notices to the insured. However, the court remanded for a factual determination on whether the insurer waived its right t
• Beverly v. Macy
  702 F.2d 931· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-11 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the National Flood Insurers Association (NFIA) did not breach its service contract with Hartford Insurance Group (Hartford) by failing to notify policyholders of policy expiration or lapse, and Mrs. Beverly was not a third-party beneficiary.
• Lockwood Corp. v. Black
  669 F.2d 324· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-05 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction despite improper removal and that Nebraska law properly applied to the contract dispute.
• Laney v. Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Inc.
  532 F. Supp. 910· S.D. Fla.· 1982-02-24 ·cited 7×
  The court held that Florida Statute § 770.01, requiring notice before filing a libel suit, applies to all defendants, including non-media defendants.
• Keaten v. The Paul Revere Life Ins. Co.
  648 F.2d 299· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-18 ·cited 7×
  The incontestability clause does not apply to a disability that manifests within two years of policy issuance, even if the underlying sickness predates the policy.
• Stoner v. Terranella
  372 F.2d 89· 6th Cir.· 1967-01-30 ·cited 7×
  The court held that an amended counterclaim filed under Rule 13(f) does not relate back to the original pleading under Rule 15(c) for purposes of the statute of limitations.
• Irwin M. Brown v. Pyle
  310 F.2d 95· 5th Cir.· 1962-11-16 ·cited 7×
  A federal court has jurisdiction over a suit arising from an automobile collision in the forum state, but venue is controlled by federal statute, not state nonresident motorist statutes.
• Newcomb v. Spring Creek Cooler Inc
  926 F.3d 709· 11th Cir.· 2019-06-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the equal-or-superior-knowledge rule does not apply to claims of respondeat superior or ordinary negligence, and that assumption of risk is not a defense when the injury arises from the negligent act of another.
• Boone v. Total Renal Labs., Inc.
  565 F. Supp. 2d 1323· M.D. Fla.· 2008-06-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA) does not provide a cause of action for pregnancy discrimination, and that federal courts have diversity jurisdiction to decide such claims.