Erie Doctrine

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

• Peters III v. Cheval Golf Club, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-01-19
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy the statutory notice requirement for their Title II claim against LKJ, warranting dismissal, and therefore declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.
• Wayman v. 3m Co.
  N.D. Fla.· 2021-12-10
  The court held that Colorado's learned intermediary, sophisticated intermediary, and bulk supplier defenses are inapplicable to a manufacturer of a consumer product marketed directly to the public, but allowed defendants to amend their answer to provide an adequate nonparty desig
• Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. v. Glassco Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-09-24
  GEICO sued Glassco Inc., a windshield repair shop, and its owners alleging they submitted fraudulent claims for reimbursement by inflating hours, listing unnecessary repairs, charging for unperformed work, and forging customer signatures, along with violating Florida's Motor Vehi
• Feldman v. Target Corp.
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-06-17
  The court ruled on various motions in limine, determining the admissibility of evidence and testimony related to a slip-and-fall incident at a Target store.
• Boneta v. Am. Med. Sys., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-05-21
  The court denied the defendant's motion for reconsideration and certification for interlocutory appeal, reaffirming that Florida law governs judicial estoppel in diversity jurisdiction cases.
• Granela v. Wal-Mart Stores E., L.P.
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-02-26
  Summary judgment is granted for the defendant because the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the defendant's actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition.
• Clay v. IH4 Prop. Fla., L.P.
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-02-04
  The court denied the parties' petition to approve a minor's settlement because the executed settlement agreement was not provided, and the parties failed to provide legal authority for a non-disclosure provision.
• Sandpiper Greens Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Empire Indem. Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-12-30
  A motion to dismiss a breach of contract claim for denial of coverage is denied, but claims for declaratory relief and breach of contract related to appraisal are granted and dismissed without prejudice because appraisal is not appropriate when coverage is denied.
• Lessard-Lanctot v. Moore
  S.D. Fla.· 2020-11-17
  The court held that a third-party plaintiff's claims for common law indemnity and statutory contribution were properly dismissed because the plaintiff failed to plead a "special relationship" for indemnity and statutory contribution is unavailable under Florida's comparative faul
• Simon Prop. Grp., L.P. v. Taylor
  S.D. Fla.· 2020-10-20
  The court held that Casino was not entitled to attorney's fees under either federal or state law because it was not the prevailing party, as the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case after achieving the injunctive relief it sought.
• Calton & Assocs., Inc. v. Simmers
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-10-06
  The court held that a technical violation of mediation confidentiality rules, without bad faith, does not warrant sanctions or discovery into further violations.
• Plain Bay Sales, LLC v. Gallaher
  S.D. Fla.· 2020-09-25
  The court held that a tortious interference claim based on the same facts as a defamation claim is barred by the single publication rule, and that a conspiracy claim fails if the underlying tort claim fails.
• Cecchini v. Cetera Fin. Grp., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2020-05-21
  The court held that the plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded claims for tortious interference with business relations and contract, and denied the defendants' motion to dismiss.
• Hsi Chang v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
  2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141571· S.D. Fla.· 2015-09-25
  The court held that the defendant's motion for attorney's fees and costs was timely under the federal local rules, and that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the defendant's settlement offer was made in bad faith.
• Meyer v. Carnival Corp.
  1990 WL 178675· S.D. Fla.· 2013-03-28
  The court held that Defendant Cox engaged in substantial and not isolated activity within Florida, establishing general personal jurisdiction under Florida's long-arm statute.
• Miller v. Anheuser Busch, Inc.
  591 F. Supp. 2d 1377· S.D. Fla.· 2008-12-29
  The court held that the plaintiff's commercial misappropriation claim was barred by the statute of limitations and also failed on the merits because she had provided express consent for the use of her likeness.
• O'Keefe v. Darnell
  192 F. Supp. 2d 1351· M.D. Fla.· 2002-02-19
  The court denied the defendants' motions to dismiss and for judgment on the pleadings, finding that the statute of limitations did not bar the claims and that the plaintiffs had standing and stated valid causes of action.
• Rabello v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.
  997 F. Supp. 2d 767· S.D. Fla.· 2001-05-17
  The court held that Defendant Bell Helicopter's willful and inexcusable failure to timely produce critical discovery, including an accident report and numerous documents, warranted sanctions.
• Bestor v. Costa Crociere
  128 F. Supp. 2d 1356· S.D. Fla.· 2000-10-25
  The court held that in diversity actions, federal courts must apply state forum non conveniens law when it is more restrictive than federal law, to prevent forum shopping and ensure equitable administration of justice.
• W. Heritage Ins. Co. v. River Ent.
  998 F.2d 311· 5th Cir.· 1993-08-23
  The court held that an insurer's duty to defend is determined by the policy's terms and the facts, even if extrinsic evidence is needed to clarify the underlying petition, and that a duty to defend necessarily precludes a duty to indemnify.
• Hans Constr. Co., Inc. v. Phoenix Assurance Co. OF NEW York
  995 F.2d 53· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-25
  The court held that an insurer is shielded from liability for both punitive and extra-contractual damages if it has an arguable basis for denying a claim. The court affirmed the summary judgment for the insurer.
• Wiley v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
  995 F.2d 457· 3d Cir.· 1993-06-03
  The court held that Pennsylvania law would infer intent to harm from acts of child molestation, precluding insurance coverage under a homeowner's policy's intentional harm exclusion.
• Claudy Jackson v. Anchor Packing Co.
  994 F.2d 1295· 8th Cir.· 1993-06-02
  The court held that Arkansas law requires asbestos plaintiffs to demonstrate that exposure to a specific defendant's product was a substantial factor in causing their injuries, applying the 'frequency, regularity, and proximity' test.
• McWATERS v. Parker
  995 F.2d 1366· 7th Cir.· 1993-05-20
  A release agreement is valid and bars a personal injury suit if the parties' mistake regarding the extent of injuries was unilateral, or if the plaintiff's reliance on alleged misrepresentations about the document's nature was unreasonable.
• Roth v. Dimensions Health Corp.
  992 F.2d 36· 4th Cir.· 1993-04-15
  The court certified a question of Maryland law regarding the retroactivity of a statutory amendment to the Maryland Health Claims Arbitration Act.
• Micromanolis v. The Woods Sch., Inc.
  989 F.2d 696· 3d Cir.· 1993-04-02
  A landowner owes a trespasser only the duty to refrain from wilful or wanton misconduct, not a duty of reasonable care, even if the trespasser is foreseeable and the injury results from an artificial condition.
• Carter v. Gen. Motors Corp. & Eaton Corp.
  983 F.2d 40· 5th Cir.· 1993-02-08
  An appeal of a costs award is timely if filed within thirty days of the clerk taxing the costs, and federal procedural rules, not state substantive law, govern the award of costs in diversity cases.
• Guest v. Phillips Petroleum Co. & Phillips 66 Co.
  981 F.2d 218· 5th Cir.· 1993-01-18
  The court held that awarding the cost of relocating a house would constitute economic waste, thus affirming the award of fair market value.
• Hemphill v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.
  982 F.2d 572· D.C. Cir.· 1993-01-15
• Wells v. Vincennes Univ.
  982 F.2d 1147· 7th Cir.· 1992-12-29
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by her failure to comply with the Indiana Tort Claims Act's notice provision, and that the pilot was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the crash.
• Premium Fin. Co., Inc. v. Emp'rs Reinsurance Corp.
  979 F.2d 1091· 5th Cir.· 1992-12-28
  The court held that the insurance policy's exclusion for acts personally participated in or ratified by the named insured applied, because the sole shareholder and chief operating officer's fraudulent actions were attributable to the corporate entity.
• Mennella v. Kurt E. Schon E.A.I., Ltd.
  979 F.2d 357· 5th Cir.· 1992-12-02
  Title to the painting passed to the buyer upon agreement of object and price, and the buyer's subsequent repudiation of the contract constituted an anticipatory breach, allowing the seller to dissolve the contract and retain partial payments pending proof of damages.
• Myron Batts v. Tow-Motor Forklift Co. & Caterpillar Indus., Inc.
  978 F.2d 1386· 5th Cir.· 1992-11-25
  Under Mississippi products liability law, recovery against a manufacturer by an injured bystander is barred if the product defect or danger is open and obvious to an ordinary user, regardless of the bystander's actual knowledge.
• Delays Brock and Sharilyn Brock v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.
  976 F.2d 969· 5th Cir.· 1992-11-10
  The court held that the injured worker was a statutory employee of Chevron, making Chevron immune from tort liability under Louisiana law.
• UNI Imports v. Aparacor
  978 F.2d 984· 7th Cir.· 1992-11-02
• Taylor v. Lloyds Underwriters OF London
  972 F.2d 666· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-24
  The court held that general maritime law does not prohibit the recovery of punitive damages from an insurance company, and state law should apply in this case.
• Hastings v. Boston Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  975 F.2d 506· 8th Cir.· 1992-09-15
• RAY Indus., Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
  974 F.2d 754· 6th Cir.· 1992-09-10
  The court held that a PRP letter from the EPA does not constitute a 'suit' under the insurance policy, and therefore does not trigger the insurer's duty to defend.
• Kutsugeras v. Avco Corp.
  973 F.2d 1341· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-01
  The court held that the district court properly applied the two-tier verdict form, bifurcating injuries into entanglement and enhancement phases, consistent with Wisconsin law as interpreted in Farrell v. John Deere Co.
• Becker v. Painewebber, Inc.
  962 F.2d 524· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-10
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish sufficient evidence of reliance losses or a link between those losses and the alleged negligent misrepresentation to warrant a jury trial.
• Sandefer OIL & GAS, Inc. v. Deanne Lounsberry Duhon and Freddie Paul Lounsberry
  961 F.2d 1207· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-04
  The court held that the horizontal Pugh clause refers to the depth of the sand from which a well is producing, not the total depth drilled, and that lessors are entitled to an accounting for production from a deeper stratum.
• Harvey's Wagon Wheel, Inc. v. Toshi van Blitter
  959 F.2d 153· 9th Cir.· 1992-03-25
  In a diversity action, a federal rule of civil procedure applies over a state rule if they are coextensive and the federal rule is within constitutional power and the Rules Enabling Act, unless strong Erie considerations mandate otherwise.
• Tucker v. R.A. Hanson Co., Inc.
  956 F.2d 215· 10th Cir.· 1992-02-03
  The court held that New Mexico's anti-indemnity statute reflects a fundamental public policy that prevents the enforcement of indemnity clauses in construction contracts, even if the contract was entered into in California.
• Nelva ROY v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  954 F.2d 392· 6th Cir.· 1992-01-22
  A vehicle is considered insured under uninsured motorist coverage if either the owner or the operator carries liability insurance meeting the state's minimum requirements, even if the other party is uninsured. Additionally, underinsured motorist coverage is not automatically prov
• Todd v. Merrell DOW Pharms.
  942 F.2d 1173· 7th Cir.· 1991-09-09
  The court held that the plaintiff waived her argument regarding the indispensability of a non-diverse party by failing to properly present it to the district court, and that summary judgment for the defendants was proper due to the lack of evidence establishing causation.
• Schulz v. Celotex Corp.
  942 F.2d 204· 3d Cir.· 1991-08-21
  The court held that expert testimony on causation need not use the exact phrase 'reasonable medical certainty' if the opinion is otherwise sufficiently definite and supported. The court also held that a party opposing summary judgment must specifically designate record evidence c
• Premium Fin. Specialists, Inc. v. Int'l Surplus Lines Ins. Co.
  938 F.2d 50· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-09
  The court held that La.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 22:1180 does not protect sophisticated premium financiers, and that the insurer's performance on the policy extinguished any right to restitution under La.Civ.Code Ann. art. 2310.
• Gormly v. I. Lazar & Sons, Inc.
  926 F.2d 47· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-13
  The court held that an indemnity agreement, even if partially void as against public policy, can be enforced to the extent of the subcontractor's negligence, absent bad faith or deliberate overreaching.
• Caesar Elecs. Inc. v. Andrews
  905 F.2d 287· 9th Cir.· 1990-06-07
  A party cooperating in good faith with a government criminal investigation is immune from subsequent civil liability under California law, even if they initiated contact with the government.
• Garst v. Tritle
  928 F.2d 81· 4th Cir.· 1990-04-04
  The court held that a federal court should not recognize a state law retaliatory discharge claim that the state's highest court has not yet recognized, absent compelling circumstances.