Imputed Knowledge

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

• Nardone v. Reynolds
  333 So. 2d 25· Fla.· 1976-05-19 ·cited 273×
  The Florida Supreme Court addressed when the statute of limitations begins to run in medical malpractice cases involving an incompetent minor. The court held that the statute commences when the injury becomes apparent and known to the parents, even if the cause of the injury rema
• Lottie Sykes Downing v. Bird
  100 So. 2d 57· Fla.· 1958-01-31 ·cited 173×
  Property owner Downing sought injunctive relief to remove a street and encroachments from her land. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's dismissal, holding that the City of Homestead failed to prove it acquired title by the statutory dedication provision or that t
• Panduit Corp. v. ALL States Plastic Mfg. Co., Inc.
  744 F.2d 1564· Fed. Cir.· 1984-09-25 ·cited 132×
  The court held that the disqualification order is appealable and that the Federal Circuit should apply the law of the regional circuit for procedural matters. The court reversed the disqualification, finding the district court erred in its application of the presumption of knowle
• United States v. Weiner
  578 F.2d 757· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-15 ·cited 119×
  The court held that juror affidavits are inadmissible to impeach a unanimous verdict returned in open court, that the Allen charge was not coercive, and that various other alleged trial errors, including restrictions on cross-examination and issues related to coconspirator hearsa
• McArthur Breedlove v. State
  580 So. 2d 605· Fla.· 1991-05-09 ·cited 108×
  McArthur Breedlove, convicted of murder and sentenced to death, appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion claiming Brady v. Maryland violations based on the prosecution's alleged failure to disclose evidence of detectives' criminal activities and investigations.
• United States v. Goss
  650 F.2d 1336· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-06 ·cited 107×
  The court held that the trial judge committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury on the good faith defense and by giving an inadequate jury charge regarding the breach of fiduciary duty in the context of mail fraud.
• Connelly v. The Special Rd. & Bridge Dist. No. 5
  99 Fla. 456· Fla.· 1930-03-05 ·cited 97×
  P.F. Connelly, an Arkansas paving contractor, sought to recover profits from a sub-contract that his employee J.W. Cooper had secretly negotiated and entered into with Smith Brothers Construction Company while still employed by and receiving wages from Connelly. The Florida Supre
• State v. Melendez
  244 So. 2d 137· Fla.· 1971-02-03 ·cited 96×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a district court decision that had overturned a defendant's conviction for narcotics offenses due to his absence during jury selection. The Court held that a defendant may ratify jury selection conducted in his absence if represented by counsel,
• The City Nat'l Bank OF Fort Smith v. Ilo Vanderboom
  422 F.2d 221· 8th Cir.· 1970-02-20 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the investors lacked standing to bring a Rule 10b-5 counterclaim because they were not purchasers or sellers of securities, and the bank's actions did not fall within the statutory coverage of Section 10(b).
• Breeding's Dania Drug Co. v. Elbert Allen Runyon
  147 Fla. 123· Fla.· 1941-05-16 ·cited 90×
  The court affirmed a judgment against multiple defendants for their concurrent negligence in causing a plaintiff's electrical injury due to defective wiring.
• Vision I Homeowners Ass'n v. Aspen Specialty Ins.
  674 F. Supp. 2d 1321· S.D. Fla.· 2009-12-15 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the expert witness's qualifications and prior association with the opposing party go to the weight of the testimony, not its admissibility, and denied the motion to strike.
• Gen. Dynamics Corp. v. Selb Mfg. Co.
  481 F.2d 1204· 8th Cir.· 1973-07-30 ·cited 77×
  The court affirmed the trial court's decision to dismiss counterclaims and strike affirmative defenses due to non-compliance with discovery orders, finding no abuse of discretion. It also affirmed the application of Texas substantive law to the tort claim.
• Harris v. The Lewis State Bank
  482 So. 2d 1378· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-01-23 ·cited 75×
  Harris v. Lewis State Bank addresses whether a bank can be held liable for malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, negligence, and fraud arising from its employees' misrepresentations that led to the plaintiff's arrest and prosecution. The court reverses prior dismissals and h
• Schacht v. Isadore Brown
  711 F.2d 1343· 7th Cir.· 1983-04-08 ·cited 75×
  The Director has standing to sue under RICO, and the complaint sufficiently alleges injury caused by the defendants' participation in the conduct of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.
• Schoenbaum v. Bradshaw D. Firstbrook
  405 F.2d 200· 2d Cir.· 1968-05-29 ·cited 75×
  The court held that a scheme to defraud a corporation by selling its treasury shares at a price that does not reflect the value of recently discovered oil reserves constitutes a fraudulent act under Rule 10b-5, even if the directors possessed the material information.
• United States v. Laughman
  618 F.2d 1067· 4th Cir.· 1980-04-11 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the sailing vessel was justified by probable cause and exigent circumstances, and that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute marijuana.
• Mallis v. Bankers Tr. Co.
  717 F.2d 683· 2d Cir.· 1983-09-01 ·cited 62×
  A trial judge may legitimately consider the passage of time and the procedural history of a case when exercising discretion on a motion for a new trial.
• Richards v. Dodge
  150 So. 2d 477· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-02-13 ·cited 60×
  A landlord sued for unpaid rent under a lease of an apartment building used as dormitory housing for a school. The trial court ruled for the tenant defendants on their counterclaim alleging constructive eviction based on the landlord's leasing of a reserved apartment to a male te
• Am. CAN Co. v. Citrus Feed Co.
  436 F.2d 1125· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-05 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the disqualification of a law firm based on a "double imputation" of knowledge from an attorney's partner to the attorney and then to a member of an independent firm was improper.
• Mrs. Betty Galuppi v. Viele
  232 So. 2d 408· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-02-13 ·cited 57×
  A plaintiff sued a corporation for negligence stemming from a 1963 accident but later discovered she had named the wrong defendant. The Florida appellate court reversed a dismissal based on the statute of limitations, holding that amending the complaint to name the true individua
• Costello v. United States
  255 F.2d 389· 8th Cir.· 1958-05-20 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the definition of 'burglary' under the Federal Firearms Act includes state-defined burglaries, even if broader than common law, and that evidence obtained from an illegal search by state officers is admissible if no federal officer participated.
• Bonded Fin. Servs., Inc. v. European Am. Bank
  838 F.2d 890· 7th Cir.· 1988-01-19 ·cited 52×
  A financial institution acting as a mere conduit for a fraudulent transfer is not an 'initial transferee' under 11 U.S.C. § 550(a)(1) and may be protected as a subsequent transferee if it takes for value and in good faith.
• Koonce v. Quaker Safety Prods. & Mfg. Co.
  798 F.2d 700· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-15 ·cited 52×
  The court held that under Texas law, a defendant seeking indemnity or contribution from a third-party joint tortfeasor is not barred by the statute of limitations, even if the plaintiff's direct claim against the third party is time-barred.
• Ferroline Corp. v. Gen. Aniline & Film Corp.
  207 F.2d 912· 7th Cir.· 1953-10-21 ·cited 52×
  The court held that where a contract expressly addresses the subject matter of secrecy, the law will not create an implied covenant of confidentiality regarding that subject matter. Furthermore, imputation of knowledge of a breach of fiduciary duty to a third party requires convi
• Aycock Bros. Lumber Co. v. First Nat'l Bank of Dothan
  54 Fla. 604· Fla.· 1907-06-01 ·cited 50×
  This case addresses whether a vendor retaining legal title to property as security for a purchase money note, and then assigning that note, can still foreclose on the property. The court held that the vendor's retention of title creates a lien akin to a mortgage, and assignment o
• Sonny Jack Harrell v. Branson
  344 So. 2d 604· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-04-06 ·cited 47×
  Branson sought rescission of a warranty deed conveying property to Harrell and Harrell's unmarried partner (Branson's niece) based on fraudulent misrepresentation that they were married. The court affirmed rescission, holding that Harrell was liable for the fraudulent concealment
• Ga. Elec. Co. v. Marshall
  595 F.2d 309· 5th Cir.· 1979-05-21 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission's order upholding the assessment of civil penalties against Georgia Electric Company was supported by substantial evidence, affirming the citations for willful and serious violations.
• Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Kerr-McGEE Corp.
  580 F.2d 1311· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-25 ·cited 46×
  An attorney-client relationship can arise when a lay party submits confidential information to a lawyer with a reasonable belief that the lawyer is acting as their attorney, even without express consent. Large law firms are not exempt from ordinary ethical considerations, and kno
• United States v. Wilshire OIL Co. OF Tex.
  427 F.2d 969· 10th Cir.· 1970-04-23 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conviction, and the double jeopardy claim was without merit. The court also found no reversible error in the handling of newspaper publicity or the imposed fine.
• Wilber H. Friend v. H. A. Friend & Co., Inc.
  416 F.2d 526· 9th Cir.· 1969-09-12 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the district court did not err in enjoining the appellant's use of certain trademarks and trade names due to his wilful infringement and misrepresentation, and affirmed the awards of damages and attorneys' fees.
• Exch. Nat'l Bank OF Chicago v. Daniels
  768 F.2d 140· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-12 ·cited 44×
  The court held that a minute order, when clarified by a subsequent transcript, could establish jurisdiction for an appeal, and that the borrowers' defenses to a promissory note were invalid.
• Compania De Elaborados De Café v. Cardinal Cap. Mgmt., Inc.
  401 F. Supp. 2d 1270· S.D. Fla.· 2004-07-15 ·cited 42×
  Summary judgment was granted because the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence to establish the essential elements of their claims, despite adequate opportunity for discovery.
• Sterling & Esther Jensen v. Snellings
  841 F.2d 600· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-06 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the federal securities claims were time-barred due to the plaintiffs' failure to exercise reasonable diligence in discovering the fraud. The RICO claims were reversed and remanded as they were timely filed under the applicable four-year statute of limitations.
• Lartigue v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. & Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co.
  317 F.2d 19· 5th Cir.· 1963-04-19 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the jury instructions on implied warranty and negligence were proper and that substantial evidence supported the jury's verdict for the defendants.
• Seymour Gilman and wife v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  660 F.2d 688· 6th Cir.· 1981-09-30 ·cited 40×
  The court held that Section 7 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 does not create a private right of action for damages for borrowers, and the FDIC, as an innocent purchaser of a note, is protected from rescission claims under Section 29(b) if it acquired the note without actu
• J. A. Jones Constr. Co. v. The United States
  390 F.2d 886· Ct. Cl.· 1968-02-16 ·cited 40×
  The United States is liable for damages caused by the Air Force's failure to disclose its plans for a high-priority construction program that necessitated premium wages, even though the Corps of Engineers was the formal contracting agency.
• United States v. Barket
  530 F.2d 189· 8th Cir.· 1976-01-28 ·cited 39×
  The court held that pre-indictment delay, even if negligent, does not violate due process unless the defendant demonstrates actual prejudice and that the delay was unreasonable, often requiring a showing of bad faith or improper motive by the government.
• Wyle v. R.J. Reynolds Indus., Inc.
  709 F.2d 585· 9th Cir.· 1983-06-30 ·cited 37×
  The court held that dismissal was an appropriate sanction for the plaintiff's willful false denials and failure to comply with discovery orders, and that such dismissal did not violate the plaintiff's right to a jury trial.
• United States v. FOX Lake State Bank
  366 F.2d 962· 7th Cir.· 1966-08-22 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the record supported a judgment for the government under the False Claims Act, even if intent to defraud was not an essential element.
• Almerico v. RLI Ins. Co.
  716 So. 2d 774· Fla.· 1998-09-04 ·cited 36×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that under section 626.342(2) of the Florida Statutes, an insurer may be held civilly liable for the actions of unaffiliated insurance agents or brokers when the insurer cloaks them with sufficient indicia of agency. The court reversed the Second Di
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Klaue
  523 F.2d 410· 9th Cir.· 1975-09-22 ·cited 36×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support the Board's finding that the employer knew of the employee's union activities prior to discharge, thus denying enforcement of the reinstatement order. However, substantial evidence supported the finding that the emplo
• Rogers v. United States
  397 F.2d 12· 4th Cir.· 1968-05-20 ·cited 36×
• Posttape Assocs. v. Eastman Kodak Co.
  537 F.2d 751· 3d Cir.· 1976-06-17 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the imputation of a principal's knowledge of trade usage to the partnership and in excluding evidence of the plaintiff's insurance coverage, both of which were relevant to establishing an agreement to l
• Inland Freight Lines v. United States
  191 F.2d 313· 10th Cir.· 1951-08-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the jury instruction improperly omitted the element of 'wilfulness' and that the trial court's comments to a witness were questionable, warranting reversal.
• Womack v. The United States
  389 F.2d 793· Ct. Cl.· 1968-01-19 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the government's erroneous estimate of index card quantity constituted a misrepresentation amounting to a breach of contract, and the variance in quantity clause did not shield the government from liability for its negligence in estimating.
• In re Wayport
  2009 WL 2246793· Del. Ch.· 2013-05-01 ·cited 32×
  The Delaware Court of Chancery entered judgment in favor of plaintiff Brett Stewart against defendant Trellis Partners Opportunity Fund, L.P. for $470,000 plus interest, based on common law fraud. The court found that Trellis committed fraud by misrepresenting that it was unaware
• COX v. Am. Cast Iron Pipe Co.
  847 F.2d 725· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-16 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the defendant waived its right to seek disqualification under Canon 4 and that the appearance of impropriety under Canon 9 did not warrant disqualification given the circumstances.
• United States v. Ragsdale
  470 F.2d 24· 5th Cir.· 1972-11-10 ·cited 32×
  The court specially concurred, holding that the searching officer had probable cause to search the automobile for weapons based on the totality of the circumstances and reasonable inferences from his partner's conduct.
• In re Tex. City Disaster Litig.
  197 F.2d 771· 5th Cir.· 1952-06-10 ·cited 32×
  The United States is not liable for the explosion of fertilizer grade ammonium nitrate (FGAN) if the explosion was caused by abnormal treatment or faulty stowage, not the inherent qualities of the product or negligence in its manufacture or transportation.
• The Mut. Life Ins. Co. OF NEW York v. Bohlman
  328 F.2d 289· 10th Cir.· 1964-02-17 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the insured's material health changes and misrepresentations between application and policy delivery, coupled with the inapplicability of imputing the medical examiner's knowledge, warranted a directed verdict for the insurer.