Imputed Knowledge

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

• United States v. DE Witt
  265 F.2d 393· 5th Cir.· 1959-04-03 ·cited 30×
  The dissenting judge would reverse and remand for trial, arguing that the court should not grant summary judgment based on a stipulation when the interpretation of 'knowing' and 'false' under the False Claims Act is unclear and requires factual determination.
• Gilison v. Flagler Bank
  303 So. 3d 999· Fla. 4th DCA· 2020-08-26 ·cited 29×
  Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of their claims for aiding and abetting fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud against Flagler Bank arising from loans made to a luxury car company that engaged in fraudulent floor plan financing. The court reversed the dismissal, holding that the
• Hull & Co., Inc. v. McGETRICK
  414 So. 2d 243· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-05-11 ·cited 29×
  A summary judgment for indemnification cannot stand if the indemnitor was not given timely notice and an opportunity to defend the underlying action.
• Dugan v. Haige
  54 So.2d 201· Fla.· 1951-09-07 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision to relieve lessees from strict compliance with a lease renewal notice period. The court found that equity could intervene despite the lessees' failure to provide timely written notice, as there was no harm to the lessors
• Michaud-Berger v. Honorable Daniel T.K. Hurley
  607 So. 2d 441· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-09-18 ·cited 28×
  A wrongful death plaintiff challenged the disqualification of her trial judge after he issued a harsh 45-page opinion against one of her attorneys in an unrelated case and then accused her other attorney of intentional misconduct during jury selection. The appellate court granted
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co.
  426 F.2d 729· 5th Cir.· 1970-04-13 ·cited 28×
  The dissenting judge argued that the bank had sufficient notice of the dishonest and fraudulent acts of its officer, Steiner, to require notification to the sureties. The dissent contended that the majority improperly narrowed the scope of Steiner's acts considered and that the D
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Tex. Indep. OIL Co., Inc.
  232 F.2d 447· 9th Cir.· 1956-04-18 ·cited 28×
  The court granted the National Labor Relations Board's petition for enforcement, finding substantial evidence supported the board's findings of unfair labor practices and discriminatory discharges.
• Alter v. Finesmith
  214 So. 2d 732· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-10-15 ·cited 27×
  A real estate broker who is also a co-investor in a joint adventure owes a fiduciary duty to disclose all material facts regarding the transaction, and breach of that duty requires an accounting for all undisclosed profits, concealed markups, and secret commissions. A fiduciary r
• Williams v. United States
  308 F.2d 326· D.C. Cir.· 1962-08-02 ·cited 27×
  An arresting officer need not have personal knowledge of all facts supporting probable cause if acting on information from other officers within the department.
• Katz v. United States
  321 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1963-07-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance, admitting corporate records with a limiting instruction, or denying motions for acquittal, affirming the convictions.
• Bateson-Stolte, Inc. v. The United States
  305 F.2d 386· Ct. Cl.· 1962-07-18 ·cited 26×
  The court concurred in the result, finding that while the plaintiff should have been permitted to recover damages, that claim was abandoned.
• Vasques v. Marcelino Lopez
  509 So. 2d 1241· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-07-08 ·cited 25×
  A landlord was found 20% negligent by a jury for injuries caused by a tenant's pit bull attack on a child, but the trial judge granted a directed verdict in the landlord's favor. The appellate court reversed, holding that circumstantial evidence of the landlord's knowledge of the
• Drake v. Island Cmty. Church, Inc.
  462 So. 2d 1142· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-09-25 ·cited 25×
  Drake addresses when the statute of limitations begins to run for a minor child's tort and contract claims against a school for sexual abuse by a teacher. The court held that the limitations period does not commence until the parent/guardian is put on notice of the cause of actio
• Hunt Land Holding Co. v. Schramm
  121 So. 2d 697· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-06-24 ·cited 25×
  Hunt Land Holding Company appealed a mandatory injunction requiring removal of a dam across a drainage ditch. The court affirmed, holding that an easement by prescription can be created without exclusive use if the use is open, notorious, continuous, and inconsistent with the own
• Seven Elves v. Eskenazi
  704 F.2d 241· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-06 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a federal bankruptcy court's finding that a debt was dischargeable because it was not for willful and malicious injury operates as collateral estoppel on the issue of probable cause in a subsequent malicious prosecution action.
• Am. Standard Credit, Inc. v. Nat'l Cement Co.
  643 F.2d 248· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that one of the district court's key factual findings was clearly erroneous, requiring reversal of its judgment, but remanded for further proceedings due to lack of findings on other crucial issues.
• Decker v. Anheuser-Busch
  632 F.2d 1221· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the 90-day period for filing suit commences when the aggrieved person, not their attorney, receives notice of the right to sue.
• Alton BOX Bd. Co. v. Goldman
  560 F.2d 916· 8th Cir.· 1977-08-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that Goldman Sachs's failure to disclose material adverse non-public information regarding Penn Central's financial condition and its own inventory decisions rendered its representations misleading, violating Section 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.
• Schwab v. Bullock's Inc.
  508 F.2d 353· 9th Cir.· 1974-11-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a default judgment should be vacated when the movant demonstrates a meritorious defense and lack of prejudice, and any doubt regarding knowledge of the action is resolved in favor of the movant.
• Phoenix Sav. & Loan, Inc. v. The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co.
  381 F.2d 245· 4th Cir.· 1967-07-06 ·cited 24×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the alleged wrongdoers were employees covered by the bond and whether their knowledge of fraudulent acts was imputable to the corporation.
• Huebner v. State
  731 So. 2d 40· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-03-17 ·cited 23×
  Kristen Huebner challenged the denial of her motion to suppress evidence from a DUI stop, arguing the arrest was unlawful because made by an officer outside his jurisdiction without fresh pursuit. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that an off-duty officer reta
• Korn v. Royal Caribbean Cruise Line, Inc.
  724 F.2d 1397· 9th Cir.· 1984-01-31 ·cited 23×
  The court should affirm the denial of the Rule 15(c) motion because the record lacks sufficient evidence to impute notice of the lawsuit's filing to the party sought to be substituted before the limitations period expired.
• Sci. Holding Co., Ltd. v. Plessey Inc.
  510 F.2d 15· 2d Cir.· 1974-12-20 ·cited 23×
  The court held that Scientific Holding Company was estopped from challenging the validity of the contract amendment due to its unreasonable delay in repudiating it, even if the amendment was initially unauthorized or procured by duress.
• Muratore v. M/S Scotia Prince
  845 F.2d 347· 1st Cir.· 1988-04-19 ·cited 22×
  A carrier is not liable for punitive damages for the intentional infliction of emotional distress by its employees unless the carrier authorized, ratified, or was aware of the misconduct, or the employees were in managerial positions.
• In re Corrugated Container Antitrust Litig. Kraft, Inc. v. Alton BOX Bd. Co.
  659 F.2d 1341· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that disqualification of counsel was proper under Canon 9 of the ABA Code of Professional Responsibility due to the appearance of impropriety arising from a substantial relationship between the firm's prior representation of Kraft and its current representation of
• Gresham & Co., Inc. v. The United States
  470 F.2d 542· Ct. Cl.· 1972-12-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the parties are bound by a stipulation agreeing that the contracts did not require automatic detergent dispensers, despite the specification language.
• Thibodaux v. McWANE Cast Iron Pipe Co.
  381 F.2d 491· 5th Cir.· 1967-07-10 ·cited 22×
  A manufacturer has no duty to warn of a danger if the party to whom the product is supplied, through its agents or engineers, knows or should know of the danger.
• ST. Johnsbury Trucking Co., Inc. v. United States
  220 F.2d 393· 1st Cir.· 1955-03-24 ·cited 22×
  A corporation can be held liable for knowingly violating regulations if any agent or servant, acting within the scope of employment, possesses the requisite guilty knowledge.
• United States v. Cooper
  200 F.2d 954· 6th Cir.· 1953-01-20 ·cited 22×
  The court held that beneficiaries cannot revive a lapsed insurance policy through waiver of premiums if the insured's failure to apply was not due to circumstances beyond their control, and physical disability alone is insufficient for waiver.
• Johnson v. Effie McLean Elliott
  64 Fla. 318· Fla.· 1912-06-01 ·cited 22×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court decree enjoining Cross & Johnson from using leased land for turpentine purposes, holding that Mary Hardy was estopped from conveying against a prior conveyance made in her name to which she had acquiesced, and that the lessees had
• W. R. Grace & Co., Inc. v. W. U. S. Indus., Inc.
  608 F.2d 1214· 9th Cir.· 1979-10-09 ·cited 21×
  The court held that Grace committed fraud on the Patent Office by submitting false affidavits, rendering its patent unenforceable and justifying the dismissal of infringement actions and the award of attorney's fees.
• In re Managed Care Litigation
  185 F. Supp. 2d 1310· S.D. Fla.· 2002-02-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while some RICO claims were properly pled, others were barred by the McCarran-Ferguson Act due to the absence of private remedies in certain states; ERISA claims were dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies or for having adequate alternative r
• Greene v. Kolpac Builders, Inc.
  549 So. 2d 1150· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-10-10 ·cited 20×
  Summary judgment was improperly granted because disputed issues of material fact exist regarding whether Kolpak misrepresented the architect's advice, and the trial court erred in denying Greene's motion to amend the complaint.
• Hooper v. Barnett Bank OF W. Fla.
  474 So. 2d 1253· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-09-05 ·cited 20×
  Dr. Hooper sued Barnett Bank to cancel a $90,000 promissory note, alleging the bank knew of fraud by attorney Hosner but failed to disclose material facts before arranging the loan. The trial court directed a verdict for the bank, but the appellate court reversed, holding that a
• Seneca B. Anderson and Martha P. Anderson v. Walthal
  468 So. 2d 291· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-03-26 ·cited 20×
  The Andersons appealed summary judgments dismissing their negligence action against Walthal, the owner of an industrial park, and his manager Hannon after Anderson was bitten by a dog owned by a tenant. The court held that Hannon's knowledge of the dangerous dog could be imputed
• Robinson v. Audi NSU Auto Union Aktienge-Sellschaft & Volkswagen of Am., Inc.
  739 F.2d 1481· 10th Cir.· 1984-07-19 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the exclusion of Volkswagen of America's prior statements regarding fuel tank risks was prejudicial error, requiring reversal and a new trial as to that defendant. However, the exclusion of similar statements as to Audi was proper due to agency timing.
• Doug Hartley, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  669 F.2d 579· 9th Cir.· 1982-02-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's finding of an unfair labor practice was not supported by substantial evidence.
• Nolan v. SAM FOX Publ'g Co., Inc.
  499 F.2d 1394· 2d Cir.· 1974-07-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims did not justify rescission of the contract and affirmed the trial court's judgment awarding monetary damages for breach of contract.
• United States v. Williams
  470 F.2d 1339· 8th Cir.· 1973-01-04 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict Walker of obstructing a criminal investigation because it did not establish his knowledge of the victim's status as an informant. The court affirmed Williams' conviction, finding sufficient evidence that he knew the vic
• McSWEENEY v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am.
  128 F.2d 660· 4th Cir.· 1942-06-04 ·cited 20×
  False representations in an insurance application, known to be untrue and material to the risk, will avoid the policy under South Carolina law, even without proof of conscious design to defraud.
• Seidman & Seidman & Binder Dijke Otte & Co. v. GEE
  625 So. 2d 1· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-04-14 ·cited 19×
  BDO Seidman, an accounting firm, appealed a $16 million judgment for negligently failing to discover a fraudulent $10 million certificate of deposit representation made by Universal Casualty's controlling officer. The court reversed, holding that the officer's fraud was committed
• Ferrer v. State
  785 So. 2d 709· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-05-23 ·cited 18×
  Jeff Ferrer challenges a DUI conviction, arguing that Deputy Vila's hearsay testimony about Officer Claremont's basis for stopping him violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses. The court holds that hearsay testimony at a motion to suppress hearing is permissible u
• Gen. Ins. Co. v. Vladimiro Ramanovski, Sr.
  443 So. 2d 302· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-12-27 ·cited 18×
  The appellate court affirmed a lower court's decision finding an automobile insurance contract valid. The court held that the insurance company was bound by the knowledge of its agent, who incorrectly advised the insured not to list his son with a restricted license on the renewa
• TTT Stevedores OF Tex., Inc. v. M/V Jagat Vijeta
  696 F.2d 1135· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that TTT Stevedores had a valid maritime lien because it lacked actual knowledge of the 'no lien' provision in the charterparty at the time the contract was made, and thus the vessel owner was not entitled to damages for wrongful seizure.
• Union Ins. Exch. v. Gaul
  393 F.2d 151· 7th Cir.· 1968-03-21 ·cited 18×
  An insurer is estopped from rescinding a policy based on misrepresentations if it possessed sufficient facts that would have prompted a prudent insurer to make further inquiry, which would have revealed the falsity of the statements.
• United States v. United States Cartridge Co.
  198 F.2d 456· 8th Cir.· 1952-08-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that contractual provisions limiting a contractor's liability for the misconduct of its subordinate employees were valid and enforceable, even in the context of a False Claims Act case, when made under specific wartime statutory authority.
• The Union Bank of Fla. & Charles Morrison v. Call
  5 Fla. 409· Fla.· 1854-01-01 ·cited 18×
  The Union Bank of Florida and assignee Charles Morrison appealed a jury verdict in favor of Richard K. Call, who claimed his debt obligation was released. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that Call had constructive notice of Morrison's assignment through h
• Grossman v. Greenberg
  619 So. 2d 406· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-06-01 ·cited 17×
  General partners of a limited partnership brought suit against fellow general partners and others for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud related to an undisclosed real estate transaction scheme. The court affirmed the constructive trust and liability findings but reversed the dam
• Jenkins v. Sterlacci
  849 F.2d 627· D.C. Cir.· 1988-06-10 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the objection to the special master's participation was waived due to the law firm's constructive notice of the conflict and the untimeliness of the motion to disqualify, and that there was no evidence of actual bias.
• Home Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Chicago v. Republic Ins. Co.
  405 F.2d 18· 7th Cir.· 1968-12-23 ·cited 17×
  An errors and omissions insurer is not bound by a settlement of a disputed claim made by the insured against a primary insurer without the errors and omissions insurer's consent or opportunity to participate, and the insured must still prove the primary insurer's liability and it