Erie Doctrine

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

• LeCONTE v. PAN Am. World Airways, Inc.
  736 F.2d 1019· 5th Cir.· 1984-07-05 ·cited 10×
  Louisiana law prohibits recovery for mental anguish suffered by a bystander due to another's injury or death, even if accompanied by physical symptoms.
• Boudeloche v. Grow Chem. Coatings Corp.
  728 F.2d 759· 5th Cir.· 1984-04-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the employee's complaint, alleging intentional ordering to work in unsafe conditions despite knowledge of danger and denial of safety equipment, was sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under the 'intentional act' exception
• City OF Aurora v. Erwin
  706 F.2d 295· 10th Cir.· 1983-04-29 ·cited 10×
  A defendant is not entitled to a jury trial before a federal magistrate for a state petty offense removed to federal court.
• Stare v. Pearcy
  617 F.2d 43· 4th Cir.· 1980-03-04 ·cited 10×
  The majority holds that the West Virginia saving statute applies to actions initially filed in foreign states, not just within West Virginia.
• Rogers v. The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co.
  601 F.2d 840· 5th Cir.· 1979-08-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a newly constructed poolhouse, 99% complete and capable of use for its intended purpose, was covered under the dwelling extension clause of a homeowners policy, and that substantial compliance with proof of loss requirements was sufficient.
• Mitchell v. AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co.
  579 F.2d 342· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury instructions were insufficient and that the trial court should have directed a verdict for the defendants on the issue of reliance on the agreement with the appraiser, reversing and remanding for a new trial.
• Medvecz v. Jae Hong Choi
  569 F.2d 1221· 3d Cir.· 1977-12-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible error by refusing to submit the issues of the anesthesiologist's alleged abandonment of the patient and the potential for punitive damages to the jury.
• Imperial Enters., Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co.
  535 F.2d 287· 5th Cir.· 1976-07-14 ·cited 10×
  A statutory merger that transfers an insurance policy to the surviving corporation does not violate a no-assignment clause if it does not increase the risk or hazard to the insurer.
• First Nat'l Life Ins. Co. v. Fid. & Deposit Co. OF Md.
  525 F.2d 966· 5th Cir.· 1976-01-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the individuals who seized control of FNL and its parent company were not 'employees' as defined by the fidelity bond, and therefore their fraudulent acts were not covered.
• Colton v. Swain
  527 F.2d 296· 7th Cir.· 1975-12-17 ·cited 10×
  A liability insurer's refusal to defend its insured, even with a no-action clause, estops the insurer from asserting that clause to bar a third-party action to determine coverage before a judgment against the insured. Furthermore, a § 1983 claim can be covered by a policy if its
• Marshall v. Mulrenin
  508 F.2d 39· 1st Cir.· 1974-12-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Massachusetts General Laws c. 231, § 51 permits an amendment adding new defendants to relate back to the original filing date for the purpose of the statute of limitations, even if Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c) would otherwise prohibit it.
• Mr. and Mrs. Albert N. Wright v. Standard OIL Co., Inc.
  470 F.2d 1280· 5th Cir.· 1972-12-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a wife has an independent, legally protected interest in the value of her nursing services rendered to her injured child, and her recovery for these services should not be reduced by her husband's comparative negligence.
• ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Mayor's Jewelers OF Fort Lauderdale, Inc.
  465 F.2d 317· 5th Cir.· 1972-08-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the insured misrepresented a material fact regarding line security, which vitiates the insurance contract under Florida law, regardless of intent.
• Bright v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
  463 F.2d 240· 9th Cir.· 1972-06-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a claim for wanton, reckless, and malicious misconduct in failing to withdraw defective tires from the market fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under California law if no physical injury to person or property is alleged.
• Rose Barge Line, Inc. v. William (Billy) Hicks
  421 F.2d 163· 8th Cir.· 1970-01-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court correctly applied the Arkansas statute of limitations because the forum state's choice of law rules dictate that the statute of limitations of the forum state applies.
• Priest v. Am. Smelting & Ref. Co.
  409 F.2d 1229· 9th Cir.· 1969-03-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a Canadian criminal conviction, particularly one where the statute shifted the burden of proof to the defendant on an essential element, should not be given collateral estoppel effect in a subsequent Washington civil suit, especially given Washington's general
• Riess v. Murchison
  384 F.2d 727· 9th Cir.· 1967-10-24 ·cited 10×
  A party's alleged repudiation of contractual obligations, short of repudiating the arbitration clause itself, does not preclude them from seeking arbitration under California law.
• Atkins v. Schmutz Mfg. Co., Inc.
  372 F.2d 762· 6th Cir.· 1967-02-16 ·cited 10×
  A federal court sitting in Kentucky in a diversity case must apply Kentucky's statute of limitations, even if a subsequent change in Kentucky law bars a claim that was timely filed under prior controlling law.
• Murle Edwards and Paul Edwards v. Am. Home Assurance Co.
  361 F.2d 622· 9th Cir.· 1966-05-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the noncompulsory provisions of an insurance policy could be cancelled separately from the compulsory provisions, even if the cancellation of compulsory provisions did not meet statutory notice requirements.
• The Indep. Nail & Packing Co., Inc. v. Mitchell
  343 F.2d 819· 1st Cir.· 1965-04-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury's verdict for the plaintiff on the negligence claim was proper, as the evidence supported a finding of negligent manufacture and the plaintiff was not contributorily negligent as a matter of law.
• Clarke E. Davenport v. Mut. Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n & Cont'l Cas. Co.
  325 F.2d 785· 9th Cir.· 1963-12-23 ·cited 10×
  A federal court should not dismiss an action for lack of jurisdiction based on the amount in controversy unless it is certain to a legal certainty that the plaintiff cannot recover the jurisdictional amount in good faith.
• Zogg v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  276 F.2d 861· 2d Cir.· 1960-04-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that New York Insurance Law § 155 applies to the insurance policy, rendering the suicide exclusion void when the insured committed suicide while insane.
• Rutherford v. Ill. Cent. R.R. Co.
  276 F.2d 330· 5th Cir.· 1960-02-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence presented genuine factual disputes regarding negligence, contributory negligence, and discovered peril, which should have been decided by a jury.
• Mayo v. Pioneer Bank & Tr. Co.
  274 F.2d 320· 5th Cir.· 1960-01-20 ·cited 10×
  The court denied rehearing petitions, reaffirming that the corporate fiction can be disregarded when it serves as a mere alter ego and that the bank acted in good faith and with fair consideration in handling transfers, protected by the Uniform Fiduciaries Act.
• Clark v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.
  196 F.2d 206· 6th Cir.· 1952-04-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff's evidence of the railroad's negligence in failing to blow the whistle or ring the bell was purely negative and insufficient to present a jury question.
• Whiteside v. S. Bus Lines, Inc.
  177 F.2d 949· 6th Cir.· 1949-11-23 ·cited 10×
  A bus company's regulation enforcing racial segregation on an interstate bus, even if sanctioned by local custom or law, constitutes an undue burden on interstate commerce and provides no immunity for damages resulting from its enforcement.
• Schultz v. Hembree
  975 F.2d 572· 9th Cir.· 1992-06-19 ·cited 9×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority incorrectly adopted a default rule for attorneys' fees in diversity cases, failing to properly apply Florida and Ohio law which require allocation of fees based on successful claims.
• Rosen v. Rucker
  905 F.2d 702· 3d Cir.· 1990-06-18 ·cited 9×
  The court held that defendants' failure to make a written settlement offer under Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 238 makes them liable for delay damages, regardless of plaintiffs' settlement demands or alleged trial delays.
• Lancer Arabians, Inc. v. Beech Aircraft Corp.
  723 F. Supp. 1444· M.D. Fla.· 1989-08-10 ·cited 9×
  The court held that Florida Statute § 768.72, which sets the standard for punitive damages, is substantive law and must be applied in federal court under the Erie doctrine, thus requiring plaintiff to meet its strictures to pursue a punitive damages claim.
• Rabatin v. Columbus Lines, Inc.
  790 F.2d 22· 3d Cir.· 1986-05-02 ·cited 9×
  A manufacturer found liable under strict liability is entitled to contribution from a defendant found liable for negligence, provided they are joint tortfeasors under Pennsylvania law.
• The First Nat'l Bank OF Miami v. Ins. Co. OF N. Am.
  535 F.2d 284· 5th Cir.· 1976-07-09 ·cited 9×
  The court held that Florida Statute § 627.428 applies to surety bonds, allowing for attorney's fees for the insured upon successful prosecution of a claim against the surety.
• Omaha Pub. Power Dist. v. The Emp'rs' Fire Ins. Co.
  327 F.2d 912· 8th Cir.· 1964-02-19 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the contract was not effective until the required insurance was in full force and effect, and since this condition precedent to performance was not met, the surety was not liable.
• Kippen v. Am. Automatic Typewriter Co.
  324 F.2d 742· 9th Cir.· 1963-11-12 ·cited 9×
  A principal cannot terminate an agent's contract for intoxication without prior warning, especially when the principal was aware of the agent's past struggles and the agent's performance remained satisfactory.
• Wilson v. Hearos, LLC
  128 F.4th 1254· 11th Cir.· 2025-02-18 ·cited 8×
  Removal by a non-party is a waivable procedural defect, not a jurisdictional one, and the court must apply state law regarding statutes of limitations and service of process after removal in a diversity case.
• Schafler v. Fairway Park Condo. Ass'n
  324 F. Supp. 2d 1302· S.D. Fla.· 2004-05-21 ·cited 8×
  The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant the defendant's motion for attorney's fees, finding that insurance coverage does not preclude an award and that federal law governs the calculation of fees.
• Sanders v. Mayor's Jewelers, Inc.
  942 F. Supp. 571· S.D. Fla.· 1996-08-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA) does not permit individual liability for the claims asserted, and that punitive damage claims under state law must comply with Fla.Stat. § 768.72, which the plaintiff failed to do.
• Al-Site Corp. v. VSI Int'l., Inc.
  842 F. Supp. 507· S.D. Fla.· 1993-12-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Florida Statute § 768.72, governing punitive damages claims, must be applied in its entirety as substantive law in federal diversity actions, including its pleading and discovery requirements.
• Watson v. Shell OIL Co. & Brown & Root
  979 F.2d 1014· 5th Cir.· 1992-12-07 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's interlocutory orders defining the class and establishing a multi-phase trial plan, finding no error or abuse of discretion in managing the mass-tort litigation.
• Barron v. Ford Motor Co. OF Canada Ltd.
  965 F.2d 195· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in applying North Carolina law and admitting evidence of the plaintiff's failure to wear a seatbelt, and that any error in excluding expert testimony was harmless.
• Lutz Farms v. Asgrow Seed Co.
  948 F.2d 638· 10th Cir.· 1991-10-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that under Colorado law, a negligence claim for purely economic loss arising from a contract is permissible, and that warranty disclaimers and limitations of remedies may be invalidated if not conspicuous, if they fail of their essential purpose, or if they are unc
• Charla Branch-Hines v. Hebert
  939 F.2d 1311· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the exclusion of plaintiff's testimony regarding emotional distress was an abuse of discretion and plain error, and that the jury's award of damages below the stipulated back pay amount was an abuse of discretion.
• Royal BED & Spring Co., Inc. v. Famossul Industria E Comercio de Moveis Ltda.
  906 F.2d 45· 1st Cir.· 1990-06-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case on the grounds of forum non conveniens, finding Brazil to be the most convenient forum.
• Shute v. Moon Lake Elec. Ass'n, Inc.
  899 F.2d 999· 10th Cir.· 1990-03-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Company owed a duty of reasonable care to helicopter pilots due to a unique wire-pole configuration that created a hazard, and that the jury's verdict finding negligence was supported by sufficient evidence and proper ju
• Doelle v. Mountain States Tel. & Tel.
  872 F.2d 942· 10th Cir.· 1989-04-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that federal rules govern counterclaims in federal diversity cases, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the condemnation counterclaim. However, the court reversed the award of equitable damages for shrubbery due to lack of legal bas
• United States Fire Ins. Co. v. Producciones Padosa, Inc.
  835 F.2d 950· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the pilot clause, incorporated into an exclusion, constituted a condition precedent to coverage, and the insured's misrepresentation of the pilot's qualifications constituted a breach, voiding coverage.
• Jones v. Cont'l Ins.
  670 F. Supp. 937· S.D. Fla.· 1987-09-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Florida Statutes Section 624.155(1)(b)(1) applies to first-party actions and is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, and that the plaintiff stated a claim under it. The court also dismissed claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and tort
• In re Asbestos Litig. Appeal of Raymark Indus., Inc. v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp.
  829 F.2d 1233· 3d Cir.· 1987-09-22 ·cited 8×
  The New Jersey Supreme Court's distinction between asbestos and other products regarding the state-of-the-art defense is rationally related to a legitimate governmental objective, specifically the legislative fact that asbestos harms were knowable to the industry.
• Deleski v. Raymark Indus., Inc.
  819 F.2d 377· 3d Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to transfer and granting summary judgment, as the claims were barred by the Pennsylvania statute of limitations.
• In re AIR Crash Disaster Near Chicago v. McDONNEL Douglas Corp.
  803 F.2d 304· 7th Cir.· 1986-10-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that evidence of the decedent's income taxes is relevant to calculating pecuniary damages in a wrongful death action under Arizona law, and that a jury should be instructed that its award of damages for lost future wages is not subject to federal income taxation.
• Bold v. Simpson
  802 F.2d 314· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instruction on legal malpractice was erroneous because it did not adequately address the disputed issue of whether the attorney represented the client on securities matters, requiring a new trial on that claim. The court also held that damages for fra