Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 15(A)

559 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 337 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• In re Perspectron, Inc. v. Aero-Dyne Corp. OF Ill.
  422 F.2d 576· 7th Cir.· 1970-02-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court correctly determined it lacked summary jurisdiction because Aero-Dyne and the United States advanced real and substantial claims to the property, which required adjudication in a plenary proceeding.
• Rowe v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co.
  421 F.2d 937· 4th Cir.· 1970-01-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion to file an amended and supplemental complaint alleging an assignment of the insured's claim against the insurer for bad faith refusal to settle.
• John M. Peters Constr. Co. v. Marmar Corp.
  329 F.2d 421· 6th Cir.· 1964-03-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint to cure defective allegations of jurisdiction.
• Scarfone v. Denby
  156 So. 2d 694· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-09-25 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed a foreclosure decree against defendants who failed to answer an amended complaint, holding that under Florida Rule 1.15(a), an answer to an original complaint does not automatically stand over as an answer to an amended complaint requiring a new response.
• Cummings v. Greif Bros. Cooperage Co.
  202 F.2d 824· 8th Cir.· 1953-03-26 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge believes the judgment of dismissal should be affirmed because the statute of limitations had run and the plaintiff's wife was a necessary party who was not joined.
• Paper Container MFG. Co. v. Dixie Cup Co.
  170 F.2d 333· 3d Cir.· 1948-08-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Paper Container, despite assigning its patent application to RFC as security, retained sufficient interest to be considered an 'applicant' under R.S. § 4915 and thus a real party in interest entitled to bring suit.
• McDOWALL v. Orr Felt & Blanket Co.
  146 F.2d 136· 6th Cir.· 1944-11-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the appellant leave to file an amended complaint, as amendments should be freely allowed when justice requires.
• Edwards v. Niles Sales & Serv., Inc.
  439 F. Supp. 2d 1202· S.D. Fla.· 2006-06-27 ·cited 7×
  The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to grant summary judgment for the defendants, denying the plaintiff's request to amend his complaint.
• Allapattah Servs., Inc. v. Exxon Corp.
  61 F. Supp. 2d 1326· S.D. Fla.· 1999-07-20 ·cited 7×
  The court held that plaintiffs are not entitled to assert a claim for punitive damages because their allegations constitute a breach of contract, not an independent tort, and the request to amend the complaint was untimely and would cause undue prejudice.
• Leaf v. Supreme Court OF the State OF Wis.
  979 F.2d 589· 7th Cir.· 1992-11-12 ·cited 7×
  The Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars federal district courts from reviewing claims that are inextricably intertwined with state court judgments, but it does not bar claims brought by individuals who were not parties to the state proceedings.
• In re Emil Stavriotis and Judith Stavriotis
  977 F.2d 1202· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-23 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the bankruptcy judge abused his discretion by denying the government leave to amend its claim.
• Fromson v. Citiplate, Inc.
  886 F.2d 1300· Fed. Cir.· 1989-10-02 ·cited 7×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the patent claims were valid and infringed, awarding damages and attorney fees, and holding individual officers personally liable. The court also affirmed the criticism of counsel's discovery conduct.
• Official Publ'ns, Inc. v. Kable News Co. & Daniel Friedman & Alfred W. Holpp, Jr.
  884 F.2d 664· 2d Cir.· 1989-08-30 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the plaintiff's Robinson-Patman and RICO claims were properly dismissed, but that the plaintiff should have been allowed to replead its RICO claim and that sanctions were not warranted.
• Lucille Head (88-5353) v. Jellico Hous. Auth.
  870 F.2d 1117· 6th Cir.· 1989-03-27 ·cited 7×
  The court held that federal regulations permit public housing authorities to count lump-sum Social Security benefits as annual income for rent calculation purposes, and that retroactive rent adjustments based on such income are permissible and reasonable under the lease and feder
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Consol. Mortg. & Fin. Corp.
  805 F.2d 14· 1st Cir.· 1986-11-10 ·cited 7×·via Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
  The court held that the three-year statute of limitations applies to commercial loans and that Consolidated's acknowledgments of debt prevented the statute from barring the FDIC's claims. However, Suro's liability as a guarantor requires further factual development.
• Bundy v. Rudd
  581 F.2d 1126· 5th Cir.· 1978-10-02 ·cited 7×
  Federal courts should abstain from interfering with pending state criminal proceedings, and a party seeking pro hac vice admission must demonstrate a protected property or liberty interest, which was not shown here.
• Yule v. Ocean Reef Community Associaton
  2020 WL 3051505· S.D. Fla.· 2020-09-01 ·cited 6×
  The court denied plaintiff's motion for partial reconsideration and for leave to amend her complaint.
• Burger King Corp. v. Ashland Equities, Inc.
  161 F. Supp. 2d 1331· S.D. Fla.· 2001-08-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that defendants sufficiently stated a claim for tortious interference with contractual relations, but lacked standing to sue under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.
• Moyer v. Walt Disney World Co.
  146 F. Supp. 2d 1249· M.D. Fla.· 2000-10-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a plaintiff must have standing at the time of filing suit, and that a motion to amend a complaint after a scheduling order deadline requires a showing of good cause, which was not met here.
• Smith v. Smith
  955 F. Supp. 2d 1352· S.D. Fla.· 1998-11-17 ·cited 6×·via Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
• Dwares v. The City OF NEW York
  985 F.2d 94· 2d Cir.· 1993-02-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the complaint adequately alleged § 1983 claims against individual officers for conspiracy to deprive plaintiff of his rights, and that the district court erred in dismissing these claims based on DeShaney and insufficient conspiracy allegations.
• Ketchum v. Salvador Cruz, M.D.
  961 F.2d 916· 10th Cir.· 1992-04-13 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the lawsuit and its order restricting the plaintiff's future pro se filings, finding the complaint frivolous and the restrictions appropriate.
• Anda v. Ralston Purina
  959 F.2d 1149· 1st Cir.· 1992-03-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that plaintiffs could not recover damages for relocation expenses they did not incur, and their tort claim was time-barred because the letters sent did not constitute a precise and specific extrajudicial claim to toll the statute of limitations.
• Perkins v. Silverstein
  939 F.2d 463· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the plaintiffs' claims because the complaint, even as amended, failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and the denial of leave to amend was not an abuse of discretion.
• Charpentier v. Godsil
  937 F.2d 859· 3d Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Dr. Lewis was immune under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act for injuries resulting from his failure to prescribe further treatment for Charpentier's mental illness, as the Act grants immunity for 'failing to prescribe' and the proviso regarding negligence in pre
• Z Channel Ltd. P'ship v. Home BOX Off., Inc.
  931 F.2d 1338· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim for damages was properly before the appellate court and that there was sufficient evidence to support a coercion theory, despite the dissent's arguments to the contrary.
• Wilmer B. GAY v. Petsock
  917 F.2d 768· 3d Cir.· 1990-10-26 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the plaintiff prisoner failed to state a claim against one defendant, presented insufficient evidence for claims against two others, and that the jury's verdict for the final defendant was permissible.
• Int'l Bhd. of Boilermakers v. Local Lodge D354
  897 F.2d 1400· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-15 ·cited 6×·via Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
  The court held that the contractual provisions of the Merger Agreement and the International's Constitution are not ambiguous and require the Local to pay per capita taxes and surrender assets until formal decertification by the NLRB.
• Davis v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
  871 F.2d 1134· D.C. Cir.· 1989-04-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that dismissal of claims for failure to provide a summary plan description against the employer was improper, but dismissal of claims for inadequate claims procedures and against the insurer for failure to provide a summary plan description was warranted. The court
• Nat'l Bank OF Wash. v. Pearson
  863 F.2d 322· 4th Cir.· 1988-12-14 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed summary judgment for the bank on the guaranty liability, reversed denial of judgment n.o.v. on punitive damages, and affirmed denial of leave to amend the answer.
• Ward Elecs. Serv., Inc. v. First Commercial Bank
  819 F.2d 496· 4th Cir.· 1987-06-02 ·cited 6×
  The district court abused its discretion by denying Ward's motion to amend its complaint, as the reasons given (change in theory and one prior amendment) were insufficient without a showing of undue delay, bad faith, prejudice, or futility.
• Hall v. Comm'r, Internal Revenue Serv. (Department OF Treasury)
  805 F.2d 1511· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-16 ·cited 6×·via Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
  The court held that the statutory prohibition against appellate review of district court determinations under 26 U.S.C. § 7429 does not bar appeals from dismissals based solely on procedural grounds, and that automatic dismissal for failure to comply with a local rule requiring a
• Barrows v. Forest Labs., Inc.
  742 F.2d 54· 2d Cir.· 1984-08-06 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint, as the proposed claims were speculative, sought a windfall, and would unduly prejudice the defendants.
• Lewis v. Earle A. Chiles
  719 F.2d 1044· 9th Cir.· 1983-11-04 ·cited 6×
  The plaintiff lacks standing to bring a derivative suit because he no longer owns shares, and his motion to amend to a class action was properly denied as the proposed amendment did not allege facts supporting a valid theory of liability.
• Devernon LE Grand v. Evan
  702 F.2d 415· 2d Cir.· 1983-03-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the dismissal of the complaint against the State of New York and the City of New York was proper, but the dismissal against the clerk Evan was erroneous and the motion to amend should have been granted.
• McINDOO v. Burnett
  494 F.2d 1311· 8th Cir.· 1974-04-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Missouri borrowing statute applies, adopting the statute of limitations of the state where the cause of action originated.
• Lathrop Douglass v. First Nat'l Realty Corp.
  437 F.2d 666· D.C. Cir.· 1970-11-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court properly granted summary judgment for the architect because the appellant's arguments raised legal construction issues, not genuine disputes of material fact, and the construction cost was correctly computed based on the owner's authorized esti
• United States v. Herrero
  416 F.2d 945· 9th Cir.· 1969-09-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government's continued maintenance of a permanent public highway after lease expiration constituted a taking by seizure, making the earlier date controlling for compensation.
• Condon v. Coyn Richardson
  411 F.2d 489· 7th Cir.· 1969-05-23 ·cited 6×·via Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the complaint stated claims under federal securities law and genuine issues of material fact remained.
• Engbrock v. Fed. Ins. Co.
  370 F.2d 784· 5th Cir.· 1967-01-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying evidence of excessive payments without a fraud or bad faith pleading, and that the jury demand was untimely.
• United States v. Feinberg
  372 F.2d 352· 3d Cir.· 1965-09-17 ·cited 6×
  A compromise agreement with the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, including a waiver of the statute of limitations, is effective even if entered into after the limitations period has expired.
• Est. of L. C. Hunt v. United States
  309 F.2d 146· 5th Cir.· 1962-10-23 ·cited 6×·via Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
  The court held that a prior judgment on the merits of an estate tax refund suit bars a subsequent suit on a new ground for refund if that ground was known and could have been raised in the first suit.
• Clardy v. Duke Univ.
  299 F.2d 368· 4th Cir.· 1962-02-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statute of limitations began to run at the time of the alleged injury, not upon discovery of the injury.
• McNAUGHTON v. The NEW York Cent. R.R. Co.
  220 F.2d 835· 7th Cir.· 1955-03-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's own negligence proximately contributed to his injuries, barring recovery.
• United States v. Classified Parking Sys., Inc.
  213 F.2d 631· 5th Cir.· 1954-06-25 ·cited 6×·via Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
• Simonton v. James
  212 F.2d 174· 5th Cir.· 1954-04-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in allowing an amendment to the complaint to correct the plaintiff's name and that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict.
• Petsel v. Chicago
  202 F.2d 817· 8th Cir.· 1953-03-17 ·cited 6×·via Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
  The court held that under the Illinois Civil Practice Act of 1933, a plaintiff should be permitted to amend a wrongful death complaint to add necessary factual allegations, even after the one-year statute of limitations has expired, if the amendment relates to the same transactio
• Heay v. Phillips
  201 F.2d 220· 9th Cir.· 1952-12-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing a second amended complaint to include a negligence claim and in denying requests for a continuance.
• Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v. Farmers Bank of Clay
  178 F.2d 570· 6th Cir.· 1949-12-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the amended complaint sufficiently alleged an actual controversy, and the district court erred in dismissing the declaratory judgment action based on untimeliness of amendments and lack of controversy.
• Stephens v. Reed
  121 F.2d 696· 3d Cir.· 1941-06-30 ·cited 6×·via Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure
  A property owner, including a national bank, is personally liable to a mortgagee for taxes paid by the mortgagee to avoid foreclosure, regardless of the owner's beneficial interest or the property's income.