Fraudulent Inducement

1,994 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Stapleton v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
  11 F. Supp. 2d 1344· M.D. Fla.· 1998-07-29 ·cited 2×
  Homeowners sued State Farm for denying flood insurance coverage under a policy issued pursuant to the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, asserting claims for breach of contract, fraud in the inducement, and deceptive trade practices. The court granted the insurer's motion to d
• Butterworth v. Quick & Reilly, Inc.
  998 F. Supp. 1404· M.D. Fla.· 1998-04-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a failure to timely amend a branch office address does not render a securities dealer unregistered, and therefore, does not entitle a customer to rescission or support claims for breach of contract, fraud, or breach of fiduciary duty.
• Irena Eugenia SAS v. Phoenix Graphics, L.C.
  700 So. 2d 422· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-10-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that arbitration was properly compelled for claims related to the underlying agreements, but erred in denying non-parties' participation in that arbitration.
• Gilman J. Hallenbeck & Lumen Sales, Inc. v. Rangeline Supply Corp.
  697 So. 2d 876· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-06-18 ·cited 2×
  Hallenbeck appeals a judgment awarding Rangeline Supply pre-settlement damages in a business purchase dispute. The court affirmed the validity of the settlement agreement and awards of attorney's fees for enforcement and defending subsequent litigation, but reversed the award of
• Walco Invs., Inc. v. Thenen
  947 F. Supp. 491· S.D. Fla.· 1996-10-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the class plaintiffs have standing to bring claims because their injuries were direct and proximately caused by the defendants' conduct, not derivative of the funding entities' claims.
• Coca-Cola Foods v. Empresa Comercial Internacional De Frutas S.A.
  941 F. Supp. 1175· M.D. Fla.· 1996-09-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an evidentiary hearing is necessary to determine personal jurisdiction over the defendants due to conflicting affidavits regarding their contacts with Florida and agency relationships.
• Ungerleider v. Gordon
  936 F. Supp. 915· M.D. Fla.· 1996-08-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims based on pre-agreement conduct, including fraudulent inducement by non-disclosure and oral promises, were barred by the written agreement and lack of actionable omission or reliance. However, claims based on post-agreement conduct regard
• Kritzman v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am.
  928 F. Supp. 1165· M.D. Fla.· 1996-06-13 ·cited 2×
  State law claims relating to an employee benefit plan are preempted by ERISA, even if the contract purports to allow state law remedies or the claim arose before the plan's existence.
• Fla. Corvette Calipers, Inc. v. Cincinnati Milacron Mktg. Co.
  670 So. 2d 1203· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-04-10 ·cited 2×
  Florida appellate court reversed a setoff under section 768.041(2) because the plaintiff's separate fraud claim against the machine seller could not be offset by a prior negligence settlement with a different defendant, as they involve distinct causes of action and separate tortf
• Jeffrey L. Berkowitz under unrecorded Declaration of Tr. dated as of July 1 v. The City OF Tamarac
  654 So. 2d 982· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-04-26 ·cited 2×
  A property owner sought damages and rescission for breach of a lease provision requiring the city to repurchase property if it imposed zoning or governmental restrictions making development economically unfeasible. The trial court dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative r
• Barberio v. Smith
  641 So. 2d 965· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-09-07 ·cited 2×
• Crown Eurocars, Inc. v. Schropp
  636 So. 2d 30· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-12-29 ·cited 2×
  Crown Eurocars and its sales manager Robert Cohen appealed a jury verdict awarding compensatory damages for fraud concerning misrepresentations about Mercedes-Benz involvement in a paint defect repair. The court affirmed the compensatory damages award but reversed the punitive da
• Smania v. Mundaca Inv. Corp.
  629 So. 2d 242· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-12-14 ·cited 2×
  The D'Oench, Duhme doctrine and 12 U.S.C. § 1823(e) prevent a borrower from asserting personal defenses against a note holder who acquired the note from the FDIC, even if the note contains a consumer protection clause, unless the note itself facially manifests bilateral obligatio
• Baptist Hosp. of Miami, Inc. v. Timke
  832 F. Supp. 338· S.D. Fla.· 1993-09-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Federal Employees Health Benefits Act (FEHBA) does not completely preempt state law claims, and therefore, a defendant's assertion of FEHBA preemption does not create federal question jurisdiction for removal.
• Fraioli v. Bobby Byrd Real Est., Inc.
  630 So. 2d 1131· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-08-11 ·cited 2×
  Fraioli sued Bobby Byrd Real Estate after a real estate agent employed by Byrd allegedly induced him to enter a lease option agreement by misrepresenting property value and tax liens on the title. The trial court granted summary judgment for Byrd, but the appellate court reversed
• Beijing Metals & Minerals Import/Export Corp. v. Am. Bus. Ctr., Inc.
  993 F.2d 1178· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the parol evidence rule barred claims based on alleged oral agreements that contradicted a written payment agreement, but that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding fraudulent inducement and claims related to the quality and quantity of goods.
• Wittekamp v. Gulf & W., Inc.
  991 F.2d 1137· 3d Cir.· 1993-04-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence of justifiable reliance on the defendant's alleged nondisclosure of vested retiree health benefits, thus affirming the grant of judgment as a matter of law.
• Wrightson v. ITT Fin. Servs.
  617 So. 2d 334· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-04-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in compelling arbitration without allowing discovery on the validity of the arbitration agreements.
• Fantasy, Inc. v. Fogerty
  984 F.2d 1524· 9th Cir.· 1993-02-02 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's rulings, holding that the striking of certain allegations was proper, summary judgment on counterclaims was correct, and the denial of attorneys' fees was not an abuse of discretion.
• Murrell v. NCNB Nat'l Bank OF Fla.
  611 So. 2d 603· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-01-08 ·cited 2×
  Summary judgment was improvidently granted in a guaranty case because material factual disputes existed regarding payment and fraudulent inducement, requiring reversal and remand for trial.
• R.I. Hosp. Tr. Nat'l Bank v. Howard Commc'ns Corp.
  980 F.2d 823· 1st Cir.· 1992-12-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that summary judgment was properly granted on the loan guaranty and that the finding of civil contempt was warranted due to appellants' actions impeding the receiver.
• Fiberlok, Inc. v. LMS Enters., Inc.
  976 F.2d 958· 5th Cir.· 1992-11-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in calculating lost profits for an established business and properly applied the UCC § 2.708(b) measure of damages when the buyer's breach caused the seller's inability to mitigate.
• Alford v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.
  975 F.2d 1161· 5th Cir.· 1992-10-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Title VII claims are subject to arbitration based on the arbitration clause in securities registration agreements, and that dismissal with prejudice is appropriate when all claims are arbitrable.
• Conti v. Pneumatic Prods. Corp. & H. Michael McCurry
  977 F.2d 978· 6th Cir.· 1992-10-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendants' contacts with Ohio were insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction, as they did not purposefully avail themselves of the privilege of acting in Ohio or causing consequences there.
• Diamond v. Interstate Trading Corp.
  606 So. 2d 631· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-09-01 ·cited 2×
  In this interlocutory appeal, defendants Diamond challenged a temporary injunction freezing their commercial bank account based on ITC's fraud and contract claims. The court reversed the injunction, holding that ITC failed to establish the essential elements of equitable relief—s
• Havoco OF Am., Ltd. v. Sumitomo Corp. OF Am.
  971 F.2d 1332· 7th Cir.· 1992-08-07 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment for Sumitomo on the breach of fiduciary duty claim, finding it time-barred, and affirmed the jury's finding of waiver on the breach of contract claim. The court also affirmed the jury's finding that a release executed by Havoco was
• Equity Cap. Corp. v. Kreider Transp. Serv.
  967 F.2d 249· 7th Cir.· 1992-07-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Kreider was not entitled to a reduction in the purchase price due to the Staley contract assignment clause, nor to a new trial based on fraudulent inducement regarding the Markum property.
• R.M. Perez & Assocs., Inc. v. Welch
  960 F.2d 534· 5th Cir.· 1992-05-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that seven of eight plaintiffs were compelled to arbitration, affirmed the arbitrators' award, but reversed the district court's reduction of attorneys' fees awarded for the district court proceedings.
• W. Chance #2, Inc. v. KFC Corp.
  957 F.2d 1538· 9th Cir.· 1992-02-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that disputed issues of material fact regarding the terms and enforceability of an alleged oral exclusive franchise agreement preclude summary judgment, and that a general release did not extinguish claims under that agreement as a matter of law.
• Advanced Med., Inc. v. Arden Med. Sys., Inc.
  955 F.2d 188· 3d Cir.· 1992-01-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting parol evidence to vary the terms of the written agreement and in its jury instructions on mitigation of damages.
• In re Allegheny Int'l, Inc.
  954 F.2d 167· 3d Cir.· 1992-01-21 ·cited 2×
  The majority erred in remanding for trial on fraud and mistake defenses that were not properly raised in the lower courts.
• Richman Bros. Records, Inc. v. U.S. Sprint Commc'ns Co.
  953 F.2d 1431· 3d Cir.· 1991-12-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court's order was not a final appealable order because it merely stayed proceedings pending a Commission decision on a tariff issue, and thus the court lacked appellate jurisdiction.
• Cajun Elec. Power Coop., Inc. v. Gulf States Utils., Inc.
  940 F.2d 117· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Louisiana Public Service Commission (LPSC) was not entitled to intervene as a matter of right or permissively in a contract dispute between two utilities because its interest was adequately represented and there were no extraordinary circumstances to justi
• Chrysler Cap. Realty, Inc. v. Grella
  942 F.2d 160· 2d Cir.· 1991-08-19 ·cited 2×
  A mortgagee who successfully bids the full amount of the debt at a foreclosure sale cannot claim damages, even if alleging fraudulent inducement, because the bid extinguishes the debt under Michigan law.
• United States for the use of Bussen Quarries, Inc. v. Thomas
  938 F.2d 831· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in finding fraudulent inducement because the defendant failed to prove the alleged misrepresentations were false or that the plaintiff had a duty to disclose the full scope of the agreement.
• White v. Brown, Jr.
  938 F.2d 474· 4th Cir.· 1991-07-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that plaintiffs' state law contract claims are not preempted by § 301 of the LMRA, but that subsequent collective bargaining agreements may preclude specific performance, though damages remain available. The court also held that summary judgment should have been gr
• United States v. Inslaw, Inc.
  932 F.2d 1467· D.C. Cir.· 1991-05-07 ·cited 2×
  The Court held that the automatic stay under § 362(a) does not apply to a party in possession of property under a claim of right at the time of bankruptcy filing, even if that possession may ultimately prove to violate the bankrupt's rights.
• Frechter v. K Mart Corp.
  578 So. 2d 316· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-03-19 ·cited 2×
  This appeal addresses whether a release signed by a slip-and-fall plaintiff should be set aside based on fraud or mutual mistake of fact. The court affirmed the summary judgment for K Mart, holding that neither fraud nor mutual mistake grounds exist where the plaintiff's known in
• Meyers v. Shore Indus., Inc.
  575 So. 2d 783· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-03-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the denial of consolidation of a mortgage foreclosure with related fraud and rescission claims was an abuse of discretion, as it risked inconsistent outcomes and the petitioners lacked an adequate remedy on appeal.
• Kassier v. Kipnis
  571 So. 2d 54· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-12-04 ·cited 2×
  Philip Kassier appealed summary judgments entered against him on a promissory note suit and a third-party fraud complaint. The court affirmed, holding that the note was supported by consideration, the plaintiff made no misrepresentations, and the third-party defendant owed no dut
• Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. OF Pittsburgh v. Woodhead
  917 F.2d 752· 2d Cir.· 1990-10-30 ·cited 2×
  A transferee of a holder in due course takes the instrument free from defenses, including fraud in the inducement, unless the transferee was a prior holder with notice of the defense or a party to the fraud.
• European Am. Bank v. Dupont Bldg. Assocs.
  567 So. 2d 971· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-10-02 ·cited 2×
  European American Bank appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment against it on claims for waste, fraud, and breach of oral agreement related to a mortgaged building. The Florida appellate court affirms the foreclosure judgment but reverses and remands the waste claim, f
• In re Heide v. Mading King Cnty. Enters., Inc.
  915 F.2d 531· 9th Cir.· 1990-10-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the assignment of a vendor's interest in a real estate contract, which includes the right to receive payments, is a transaction intended to create a security interest in personal property and is therefore governed by Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
• Ward Petroleum Corp. v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. for the First Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. of Okla. City, N.A.
  903 F.2d 1297· 10th Cir.· 1990-05-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the issuer of a standby letter of credit must honor a draw if the presented documents facially comply with the credit's terms, even if the documents contain statements that might raise questions about the underlying transaction.
• Graham v. Friendly Ford, Inc.
  552 So. 2d 1165· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-11-07 ·cited 2×
  The court modified an arbitration order to require prior judicial determination of fraud and failure of consideration claims before compelling arbitration of an indemnity claim, because the validity of the underlying lease containing the arbitration clause must first be establish
• Verde Cap. Corp. v. Gutierrez
  548 So. 2d 698· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-07-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the mortgage lien expired under section 95.281, Florida Statutes, barring the action, and that constitutional claims were not preserved.
• Dantzler Lumber & Exp. Co. v. Defreitas
  544 So. 2d 1135· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-06-14 ·cited 2×
  An employer appeals a jury verdict finding breach of an employment agreement, arguing the trial court should have directed a verdict against the employee. The court affirms, holding that the employee's involuntary resignation made under duress was voidable and that disputed factu
• F.A. McGEE v. Emmer Dev. Corp. & Philip I. Emmer
  541 So. 2d 1292· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-04-11 ·cited 2×
  An implied contract to pay discretionary bonuses may exist where an employer has paid bonuses consistently over many years, but the trial court's finding that employees were substantially overpaid in prior years, supported by substantial evidence of EDC profits and prior bonus pa
• Bernard v. Rockwell Int'l Corp.
  869 F.2d 928· 6th Cir.· 1989-03-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an express at-will employment contract cannot be modified by an employee handbook absent clear intent to do so, and that plaintiffs failed to establish claims for fraud or promissory estoppel.
• Sander S. Dines v. Ultimo
  532 So. 2d 1131· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-10-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the mortgagees, who accepted a mortgage in good faith for value without knowledge of fraud, are entitled to foreclose, even though the mortgagors were defrauded by a third party.