Erie Doctrine

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

• Cont'l Cas. Co. v. Ohio Edison Co.
  126 F.2d 423· 6th Cir.· 1942-03-12 ·cited 2×
  An insurer subrogated to an insured's rights cannot recover indemnity from a third party where the insured's own primary negligence caused the injury for which the insured was held liable.
• Edmund Realty Co. v. Walmer BLDG. Co.
  123 F.2d 54· 8th Cir.· 1941-10-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the fee owner's proposed formula for dividing a condemnation award between a lessee and owner was not binding and that the trial court properly determined the values based on substantial evidence and Missouri Supreme Court precedent.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. for the Buckhead Cmty. Bank v. Loudermilk
  930 F.3d 1280· 11th Cir.· 2019-07-22 ·cited 1×
  The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as receiver for failed Buckhead Community Bank, sued eight former bank directors for negligence in approving ten risky loans that led to the bank's collapse. A jury found the directors negligent in approving four loans and held them join
• Bluesky Greenland Env't Solutions, LLC v. 21st Century Planet Fund, LLC
  1992 WL 180693· S.D. Fla.· 2013-12-04 ·cited 1×
  The court held that there are genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the defendants engaged in fraud, civil conspiracy, unjust enrichment, and tortious interference, thus denying the motion for summary judgment.
• Century Sur. Co. v. Seductions, LLC
  609 F. Supp. 2d 1273· S.D. Fla.· 2009-03-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the assault and battery endorsement's $25,000 sub-limit applied to the patron's negligence claims because they arose from the assault and battery, and that the 'wrongful eviction' provision did not apply as the patron lacked a possessory interest.
• Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc.
  526 F. Supp. 2d 1236· M.D. Fla.· 2007-09-17 ·cited 1×
  The court held that a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding the contract's terms, precluding summary judgment on breach of contract and good faith claims, but granted summary judgment against specific performance for a private jet.
• Harley v. Health Ctr. of Coconut Creek, Inc.
  469 F. Supp. 2d 1212· S.D. Fla.· 2006-12-21 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the defendant waived the privilege to exclude AHCA reports by failing to object in the pretrial stipulation and during a prior trial.
• Sachs v. TWA Getaway Vacations, Inc.
  125 F. Supp. 2d 1368· S.D. Fla.· 2000-08-16 ·cited 1×
  A tour operator is not liable for the negligent acts of third-party suppliers of services to tour participants if the operator exercised reasonable care in selecting those suppliers and did not have control over the instrumentality causing the injury.
• Metcalf v. Beverly Health & Rehab. Servs., Inc.
  32 F. Supp. 2d 1307· N.D. Fla.· 1999-01-08 ·cited 1×
  Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, not state law, govern pleading requirements in federal court, including claims for punitive damages.
• Revenue Mkts., Inc. v. Amwest Sur. Ins.
  35 F. Supp. 2d 899· S.D. Fla.· 1998-11-09 ·cited 1×
  The court held that Amwest did not breach the indemnity agreement or the implied duty of good faith, and that Amwest was entitled to indemnity and exoneration.
• Neill v. Gulf Stream Coach, Inc.
  966 F. Supp. 1149· M.D. Fla.· 1997-05-29 ·cited 1×
  The Florida statute governing the pleading of punitive damages applies in federal court because it creates a substantive right, and applying federal rules would lead to inequitable administration of law and forum shopping.
• Sfc Valve Corp. v. Wright Mach. Corp.
  883 F. Supp. 710· S.D. Fla.· 1995-03-29 ·cited 1×
  The economic loss rule bars Sfc's negligence claim because it seeks purely economic damages arising from a breach of contract. Sfc's fraud claim, as pled, also relies on the breach of contract and is therefore barred, though leave to amend is granted.
• First R.R. Cmty. Fed. Credit Union v. Columbia Cnty. Bank
  849 F. Supp. 780· M.D. Fla.· 1994-04-15 ·cited 1×
  A bank's duty to pay its cashier's checks upon presentment should not depend on whether the presenter is a holder in due course, but only on whether the presenter is a legitimate holder.
• Jaurequi v. John Deere Co. & Deere & Co.
  986 F.2d 170· 7th Cir.· 1993-02-08 ·cited 1×
  The Indiana statute of repose should bar the plaintiff's claim because the forum state's statute of limitations generally applies, and this case is not exceptional.
• Grantham v. Avondale Indus., Inc.
  964 F.2d 471· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-30 ·cited 1×
  In a diversity action, the applicability of a state statutory employer immunity defense when a plaintiff has elected federal Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) benefits is a question of federal law, and the district court is bound by the precedent of the feder
• Horace Mann Ins. Co. v. Johnson
  953 F.2d 575· 10th Cir.· 1991-12-17 ·cited 1×
  The dissenting opinion argues that a defendant's counsel's planned vacation rendered the defendant unavailable for trial, thus tolling the speedy trial period and making the denial of discharge proper.
• S. Milk Sales, Inc. v. Martin
  924 F.2d 98· 6th Cir.· 1991-01-22 ·cited 1×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and that the issue of injunctive relief under Rule 65 is governed by federal procedural law.
• Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. OF Pittsburgh v. Engineering-Science, Inc.
  884 F.2d 1208· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-06 ·cited 1×
  An insurer cannot bring a subrogation action against a party it also insures under a separate policy, and attorney's fees under a contract are not awarded for tort claims.
• Webb v. TOM Brown, Inc.
  807 F.2d 783· 9th Cir.· 1987-01-05 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment based on the Montana workers' compensation exclusivity provision, as the Montana fund's late and unsolicited assertion of liability was not definitively binding and required further factual inquiry.
• The Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Gardina
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-08-08
  The court denied defendants' motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial, finding that the jury's verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and that the continuing tort doctrine was properly applied.
• Meraki Installers LLC v. NEW E. Solar Energy (america) Inc
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-07-18
  The court held that the defendant's breach of contract and promissory estoppel claims were sufficiently pleaded, but dismissed the separate count for attorney's fees.
• Benavides v. Tesla, Inc
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-06-30
  Plaintiffs sued Tesla over a 2019 collision in which a Tesla Model S using Autopilot struck a parked vehicle, killing one plaintiff and injuring another; the case proceeded to trial on defective design and failure-to-warn claims after the court granted summary judgment on two oth
• Belton v. Walmart, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-03
  The court held that the plaintiff's testimony regarding track-like footprints in the water, combined with the circumstances, created a genuine issue of material fact regarding the defendant's constructive notice of the dangerous condition, thus precluding summary judgment.
• Myers v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-04-25
  The court held that the defendants' offer of judgment was valid and timely filed, and that the plaintiff failed to prove the offer was made in bad faith.
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Taylor
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-03-11
  A certificate of insurance issued by an authorized agent of an insurer, naming an entity as an insured, can obligate the insurer to provide coverage to that entity, even if the entity is not named in the underlying policy, and even if the certificate contains disclaimer language.
• The Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Gardina
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-12-17
  The court denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment on claims of fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, and breach of contract, finding genuine issues of material fact exist.
• Atlas Conglomerate of Ridiculous Proportions LLC v. NFT Techs., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-11-08
  The court recommended granting in part and denying in part the plaintiff's motion for default judgment, finding sufficient allegations for breach of contract but not for declaratory judgment or fraudulent transfer.
• Noshirvan v. Couture
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-13
  The court granted the defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings, dismissing Counts I and VI without prejudice, with leave for the plaintiff to amend.
• Puig v. Sazerac Co., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-12
  The court held that the plaintiff's allegations sufficiently stated a plausible claim under Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA), and thus the defendant's motion to dismiss was denied.
• Columbie v. Clear Blue Specialty Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-22
  The court held that plaintiffs' counsel's misstatement during a deposition and the use of an unlicensed adjuster's estimate did not constitute fraud upon the court or grounds for dismissal or summary judgment.
• Villanueva Castellanos v. BJ's Wholesale Club Inc
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-08-15
  The court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff's motion to strike Defendant's affirmative defenses, striking the failure to mitigate defense but allowing the Fabre defense to proceed.
• Coomer v. Byrne
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-31
  The court held that Colorado's anti-SLAPP statute's discovery stay provision is inapplicable in federal court because it is procedural and conflicts with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Therefore, a stay of discovery is not warranted.
• Prime Prop. & Cas. Ins., Inc. v. Old Republic Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-04-22
  The court held that FTL and Holguin are not permissive insureds under Old Republic's policy because the lease agreement did not contain the necessary language to extend coverage. The court also found that Prime's policy is primary for FTL and Holguin.
• Transamerica Life Ins. Co. v. White
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-04-11
  The court held that the defendants' motion to bifurcate punitive damages claims for discovery purposes would be denied, and the defendant's objection to the magistrate judge's discovery order would be overruled.
• LM Gen. Ins. Co. v. Blackwell
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-26
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to award attorney's fees under Fla. Stat. § 627.428 because the fee award was integral to the merits of the case, not a collateral issue, following the dismissal of the underlying declaratory judgment action for lack of ju
• Silk Way W. Airlines, LLC v. Intrepid Aerospace, Inc
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-11
  Summary judgment is granted for the plaintiff on its breach of contract claim because the defendant failed to deliver goods or refund payment, and its affirmative defenses lacked merit.
• Grayson v. No Labels, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-29
  The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation, overruling the plaintiff's objections and awarding the defendants $740,710.00 in attorneys' fees.
• Reed v. Chamblee
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-05
  The court denied plaintiff's motions for recusal and reconsideration, and granted defendants' motion for attorney fees and costs under Florida's anti-SLAPP statute.
• Porras v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-12-08
  The court held that the United States has not waived sovereign immunity for attorneys' fees and non-taxable costs under the FTCA or EAJA, even when state law would otherwise allow such an award.
• Baldwin v. Express Oil Change, LLC
  87 F.4th 1292· 11th Cir.· 2023-12-06
  Charles Baldwin, a former manager for Express Oil Change franchises who received nearly $2 million in a sale of business assets, challenged a restrictive covenant limiting his ability to compete as unreasonable under Georgia law. The Eleventh Circuit held that the covenant's geog
• Rose v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-07-18
  The court held that the plaintiff presented sufficient circumstantial evidence, specifically testimony about cart marks, to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the defendant's constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition.
• Drummond v. Alsaloussi
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-07-14
  The court held that while the plaintiff is not required to immediately remove the lis pendens pending appeal, he must post a supersedeas bond to safeguard the defendants' rights to potential sale proceeds.
• Pearson v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-07-10
  The court held that because the action was subject to dismissal for failure to comply with pre-suit notice requirements, there was no pending action in which to enter a confessed judgment, thus precluding an award of attorney's fees.
• Triton Renovation, Inc. v. Empire Indem. Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-07-06
  The court held that while the appraisal award is confirmed, judgment cannot be entered because the insurer still has viable affirmative defenses to address.
• Victor v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-04-18
  Discovery regarding an insurer's general business practices is relevant and not subject to a stay, even if a cost bond for punitive damages discovery is required.
• Judge v. Knauf Gips KG
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-04-14
  The court held that a prior jury verdict, final judgment, and satisfaction of judgment constitute an 'award' of punitive damages under Fla. Stat. § 768.73(2)(a), but that a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding whether that award was insufficient to punish the defendant
• Sanchez v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-03-08
  Summary judgment is granted because the plaintiff failed to present evidence establishing causation for her negligence claim.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London
  45 F.4th 1301· 11th Cir.· 2022-08-19
  The Eleventh Circuit held that a demand for prejudgment interest under Georgia law is timely if made before the entry of a coercive final judgment, not merely a declaration of liability.
• Marshall v. Wal-Mart Stores E. LP
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-07-12
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding Wal-Mart's constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition, precluding summary judgment.
• N. Palm Motors, LLC v. Gen. Motors LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-03-10
  A proposal for settlement is not rendered ambiguous by expansive language in an attached general release, provided the proposal itself is clear.