Erie Doctrine

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

• Rositer v. BOB Toomey Truck Leasing, Inc.
  567 F.2d 938· 10th Cir.· 1977-12-16 ·cited 4×
• Cont'l Grain Co. v. Clem Martin and Clem Martin
  536 F.2d 592· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Martins were merchants under the Texas Uniform Commercial Code, making their oral agreement for soybean sales enforceable despite the Statute of Frauds.
• Butler v. Merrill Lynch
  528 F.2d 1390· 9th Cir.· 1975-12-22 ·cited 4×
  This case concerns a dissent from a majority opinion that held a trustee adequately represented all beneficiaries' interests in a declaratory judgment action regarding trust assessments.
• Kincaid Cotton Co., Inc. v. Kesey Bros.
  504 F.2d 976· 5th Cir.· 1974-12-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred by not determining applicable Texas law and resolving factual issues regarding a contract's option clause, necessitating a remand for trial.
• Ellis B. Hall v. The Atchison
  504 F.2d 380· 5th Cir.· 1974-11-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict, as there was sufficient evidence of negligence, causation, and foreseeability to present the case to a jury.
• Wise v. George C. Rothwell, Inc.
  496 F.2d 384· 3d Cir.· 1974-04-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court applied an erroneous standard of care under Delaware law regarding a driver entering a highway from a private road, and that contributory negligence was not established as a matter of law.
• Canal Ins. Co. v. Baldree
  489 F.2d 1393· 5th Cir.· 1974-02-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the geographical limitation endorsement suspended coverage while the vehicle was outside the radius, but coverage reattached once the vehicle returned within the radius, even if the trip had exceeded it.
• Guinand v. Atl. Richfield Co.
  485 F.2d 414· 10th Cir.· 1973-10-12 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the summary judgment, holding that no contractual or tort liability was established under Wyoming law based on the stipulated facts.
• Nelms v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  463 F.2d 1190· 5th Cir.· 1972-07-06 ·cited 4×
  A federal court sitting in diversity jurisdiction in Texas must apply Texas conflict-of-laws rules, which characterize Louisiana's direct action statute as procedural, thus barring the direct action.
• Goehring v. Diamond Milling Co., Inc.
  461 F.2d 77· 3d Cir.· 1972-05-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's post-trial attempt to invalidate a joint tortfeasors' release was untimely, as it caused prejudice to the estate and should have been raised earlier.
• Tompkins v. The City OF EL Paso
  449 F.2d 842· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-29 ·cited 4×
  A sidewalk adjacent to an airport parking lot, used for pedestrian accommodation, is considered appurtenant to the airport facility, and thus falls under sovereign immunity protection in Texas.
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Coleman C. Murnion and Virginia Murnion
  439 F.2d 945· 9th Cir.· 1971-03-24 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the jury's finding that notice was given as soon as practicable, excusing the delay due to the trivial nature of the accident and lack of apparent injury.
• Vason v. Nickey
  438 F.2d 242· 6th Cir.· 1971-02-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that under Tennessee law, a cause of action for personal injuries accrues at the time of the injury, not at the time of the breach of duty, when the plaintiff had no connection to the defective condition and suffered no harm at the time of completion.
• Tenneco, Inc. v. Greater Lafourche Port Comm'n
  427 F.2d 1061· 5th Cir.· 1970-06-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the condition in the Department of Public Works letter did not require Tenneco to pay for pipeline alterations outside the original state-granted right of way for the bayou crossing.
• Bennie v. Pastor
  393 F.2d 1· 10th Cir.· 1968-04-08 ·cited 4×
  A release signed for property damage can be avoided due to mutual mistake regarding the existence of personal injuries, even if the absent party who also signed the release is not before the court, especially when state law permits the action to proceed.
• Grover C. KAY v. The Home Indem. Co.
  337 F.2d 898· 5th Cir.· 1964-11-04 ·cited 4×
• Am. Universal Ins. Co. v. Chauvin
  329 F.2d 174· 5th Cir.· 1964-03-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that under Louisiana law, statutory subrogation does not grant an insurer the right to reimbursement from a third party for excess medical costs voluntarily paid beyond the statutory maximum.
• Slater v. Stoffel
  313 F.2d 175· 7th Cir.· 1963-02-08 ·cited 4×
  A federal court adjudicating a state-created right must apply state procedural rules, including estate claim filing requirements, even if it means dismissing the federal action.
• Russell v. Sarkeys
  286 F.2d 736· 5th Cir.· 1961-02-06 ·cited 4×
  A good faith purchaser at a judicial sale, whose purchased property is later determined to belong to a third party, is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the judgment creditor against the judgment debtor.
• Davis v. AETNA Life Ins. Co.
  279 F.2d 304· 9th Cir.· 1960-05-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a criminal conviction for voluntary manslaughter is not conclusive proof in a civil action that the killing was intentional, and the beneficiary is entitled to an opportunity to present evidence that the killing was accidental.
• C. D. Johnson LBR. Corp. v. Hutchens
  194 F.2d 574· 9th Cir.· 1952-02-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred by instructing the jury that the deceased's employment status was immaterial to the application of the Oregon Employers' Liability Act.
• Associated Indem. Corp. v. Davis
  136 F.2d 71· 3d Cir.· 1943-05-28 ·cited 4×
  An insurer is not relieved from liability under a policy due to the insured's failure to cooperate unless that failure results in substantial prejudice to the insurer's position.
• Arab Corp. & Duneco, Inc. v. Bruce
  129 F.2d 94· 5th Cir.· 1942-06-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prior state court decision, which relied on extrinsic evidence to interpret an ambiguous deed, was not binding on the federal court's determination of the pleadings alone. Therefore, the dismissal for failure to state a claim was erroneous.
• Primerica Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Mitchell
  48 F. Supp. 2d 1363· S.D. Fla.· 1999-01-13 ·cited 3×
  The court affirmed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the defendant's motion to dismiss because the plaintiffs had adequately stated claims for tortious interference, civil conspiracy, unfair competition, and unjust enrichment, and Florida's statute regardi
• Braddock v. Orlando Reg'l Health Care Sys., Inc.
  881 F. Supp. 580· M.D. Fla.· 1995-04-04 ·cited 3×
  Federal courts sitting in diversity must apply the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure when state procedural requirements directly conflict with them, even if state law labels those requirements as substantive.
• Consol. Am. Ins. v. Hinton
  845 F. Supp. 1515· M.D. Fla.· 1994-02-09 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged claims for bad faith against attorney Blunt and that abstention from exercising federal jurisdiction was not warranted due to parallel state proceedings.
• Ticor Title Ins. v. Univ. Creek, Inc.
  767 F. Supp. 1127· M.D. Fla.· 1991-06-19 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Shubows' affidavit and lis pendens constituted an encumbrance covered by the title policy, and that University Creek's settlement was a covered loss due to Ticor's unreasonable delay and refusal to act.
• Torres v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc.
  867 F.2d 1234· 9th Cir.· 1989-02-15 ·cited 3×
  The court agreed that Goodyear could not be held liable under warranty, agency, or section 400 theories and agreed to certify a question to the Arizona Supreme Court. However, the judge dissented regarding the phrasing of the certified question.
• Jones v. Darin & Armstrong, Inc.
  785 F.2d 1521· 11th Cir.· 1986-04-07 ·cited 3×
  The court held that union pension and welfare fund trustees are exempt from the 45-day notice requirement under Florida's Little Miller Act, as they stand in the shoes of laborers.
• Malisse Brown v. Seaboard Coastline Railroad
  405 F.2d 601· 5th Cir.· 1968-12-18 ·cited 3×
  The dissenting judge believes the evidence presented a jury question regarding the railroad's negligence and the applicability of the last clear chance doctrine, thus disagreeing with the majority's affirmance.
• Kinsale Ins. Co. v. Pride of St. Lucie Lodge 1189, Inc.
  135 F.4th 961· 11th Cir.· 2025-04-18 ·cited 2×
  Kinsale Insurance Company insured a nightclub where a shooting occurred following a fight between patrons; the victim was awarded $3.348 million in damages, far exceeding Kinsale's $50,000 assault and battery sublimit. The Eleventh Circuit reversed summary judgment on the lodge's
• De Varona v. Disc. Auto Parts, LLC
  1990 WL 167198· S.D. Fla.· 2013-03-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement because the parties' stipulated dismissal, filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), divested the court of jurisdiction except for the specifically reserved IRS paymen
• Nat'l Union Fire Ins. v. Beta Constr. LLC
  816 F. Supp. 2d 1256· M.D. Fla.· 2011-09-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the motion for summary judgment was premature because discovery was incomplete and genuine issues of fact remained regarding the duty to indemnify and choice-of-law issues.
• Farias v. MR. Heater, Inc.
  757 F. Supp. 2d 1284· S.D. Fla.· 2010-11-19 ·cited 2×
  A manufacturer has no duty under Florida law to provide bilingual warnings on its products unless it purposefully targets a specific linguistic group, and a plaintiff's failure to read available warnings bars recovery due to lack of proximate cause.
• Hartford Ins. Co. of Midwest v. Koeppel
  629 F. Supp. 2d 1293· M.D. Fla.· 2009-05-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an insurer has standing to bring legal malpractice and breach of contract claims against an attorney hired to represent its insured, as the insurer is considered to be in privity or an intended third-party beneficiary.
• Buell v. Direct Gen. Ins. Agency, Inc.
  488 F. Supp. 2d 1215· M.D. Fla.· 2007-06-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Unfair Insurance Trade Practices Act (UITPA) does not create a private right of action for violations of section 626.9541(l)(z), Florida Statutes, as the legislature did not intend to confer such a right.
• Alexander v. University/Gainesville Healthcare Ctr., Inc.
  17 F. Supp. 2d 1291· N.D. Fla.· 1998-03-11 ·cited 2×
  Florida Statute § 768.72, requiring a preliminary evidentiary showing for punitive damages, directly conflicts with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) and must yield in federal diversity cases.
• Barnett Bank of S. Fla. v. Fed. Deposit Ins.
  883 F. Supp. 707· S.D. Fla.· 1995-03-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it must give proper regard to a state court's interpretation of state law, even when removed to federal court, and denied the motion to vacate the judgment.
• Gonsalves v. Flynn
  981 F.2d 45· 1st Cir.· 1992-12-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were time-barred because the amended Massachusetts tolling statute, which removed imprisonment as a condition for tolling the statute of limitations, applied to his suit filed after the amendment's effective date.
• Juedell T. Lawrence v. Va. Ins. Reciprocal
  979 F.2d 1053· 5th Cir.· 1992-12-09 ·cited 2×
  An insurer is not estopped from asserting sovereign immunity in a garnishment action if the insured and insurer did not have aligned interests in the underlying litigation. Sovereign immunity is waived for mental anguish damages to the extent of available insurance, but not for p
• Sandra Judith "Sandy" Simons Solomon v. Walgreen Co.
  975 F.2d 1086· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding the existence of an employment contract or grounds for estoppel, affirming the grant of summary judgment.
• Grimes v. Swaim
  971 F.2d 622· 10th Cir.· 1992-08-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the insurer's obligation to pay postjudgment interest did not terminate upon payment of the policy's liability limit alone, as the policy language 'amount due under this coverage' included both the damages and the postjudgment interest.
• Advey v. The Celotex Corp.
  962 F.2d 1177· 6th Cir.· 1992-04-28 ·cited 2×
  A notice of appeal filed during the pendency of a Rule 59(e) motion in one of two consolidated cases is a nullity as to that case, but not necessarily as to the other case if the parties and issues are not sufficiently merged.
• Chevalier v. Reliance Ins. Co. OF Ill.
  953 F.2d 877· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the insurer's policy provided uninsured motorists coverage because the insured had liability coverage, and that the jury's damage awards were supported by the evidence and not subject to penalties or fees.
• Sandler v. AII Acquisition Corp., Inc.
  954 F.2d 382· 6th Cir.· 1992-01-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's actions did not constitute a clear and unequivocal waiver of the Settlement Agreement's time provisions, thus releasing the plaintiff from the agreement due to the defendant's failure to timely perform.
• Parker Plaza W. P'rs v. UNUM Pension & Ins. Co.
  941 F.2d 349· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a prepayment premium is not rendered unenforceable as a matter of Texas law solely because it is triggered by the lender's acceleration of the loan due to borrower default, rather than by the borrower's voluntary prepayment.
• Ball v. Belcher
  958 F.2d 36· 4th Cir.· 1991-08-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that mere exposure to toxic chemicals, without resulting physical injury, does not allow recovery for emotional distress or costs of medical surveillance under West Virginia or Virginia common law.
• S.G. and A.E. v. Am. Nat'l RED Cross
  938 F.2d 1494· 1st Cir.· 1991-07-24 ·cited 2×
  The 1947 amendment to the American National Red Cross charter, 36 U.S.C. § 2, does not confer original federal subject matter jurisdiction over all suits involving the Red Cross.
• United States v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  936 F.2d 206· 5th Cir.· 1991-07-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government can recover medical costs as a third-party beneficiary under state law, and federal law does not preclude this recovery.
• Mozeke v. Int'l Paper Co.
  933 F.2d 1293· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury charge adequately explained Louisiana law regarding a manufacturer's duty to warn sophisticated users and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial, as there was evidence to support the jury's verdict.