Imputed Knowledge

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

• VIC Potamkin Chevrolet, Inc. v. Junie Horne
  505 So. 2d 560· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-04-07
  Vic Potamkin Chevrolet sold a car to a driver with a restricted license. The driver subsequently caused an accident injuring a passenger, who sued the dealer for negligent entrustment. The Third District Court of Appeal, sitting en banc, declined to extend negligent entrustment d
• United States v. Sentry Ins.
  774 F.2d 80· 4th Cir.· 1985-10-03
  The court held that Seaboard was entitled to the misapplication of funds defense, but Sentry's knowledge of the payment scheme created a factual dispute precluding summary judgment. The court also affirmed summary judgment for the sureties regarding funds West Chester allowed Cof
• Pina v. Henderson
  752 F.2d 47· 2d Cir.· 1985-01-04
  The State prosecutor did not violate Brady v. Maryland by withholding exculpatory evidence because the parole officer's report was not in the prosecution's control, and judicial notice of an officer's report was improper.
• Duncan v. H.M. Leeds
  742 F.2d 989· 6th Cir.· 1984-09-07
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the medical malpractice complaint as time-barred because the complaint adequately alleged fraudulent concealment, which tolls the statute of limitations.
• In re Merlyn W. Rieber and Sharon K. Rieber v. Merlyn W. Rieber and Sharon K. Rieber
  740 F.2d 10· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-31
  A financing statement amendment that substantially complies with UCC requirements and provides notice of a security interest is effective to perfect that interest, even if not signed by the debtor.
• First Am. Title Ins. Co. v. Kessler
  452 So. 2d 35· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-05-08
  First American Title Insurance Company appeals a summary judgment awarding Harold Kessler $478,400 under title insurance policies. The court reverses, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding whether defects in title were assumed or agreed to by co-beneficiaries, whether
• Special Disability Tr. Fund v. Foster Wheeler & Claims Mgmt. Servs.
  440 So. 2d 460· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-11-02
  The dissenting opinion argues that the employer's informed conclusion that the claimant's permanent impairment was a hindrance to employment was sufficiently evidenced by their actions and knowledge of the claimant's work.
• Lawrence Sys., Inc. v. Adell
  719 F.2d 184· 6th Cir.· 1983-10-13
  The court held that Lawrence Systems, Inc. could not be held liable for fraud or breach of fiduciary duty because its contractual obligations did not include assuring that inventory was paid for in cash, and any knowledge of credit transactions by its employee predated her employ
• A/S Ivarans Rederei v. Puerto RICO Ports Auth.
  617 F.2d 903· 1st Cir.· 1980-04-01
  The court held that the reinsured's failure to disclose material facts about prior incidents voids the reinsurance policy.
• Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co.
  590 F.2d 1200· D.C. Cir.· 1978-12-21
  The court held that the sellers did not breach the warranty by failing to include the tenant's murder in written disclosures, as oral disclosure was made and CBI reasonably believed insurance would cover any potential liability.
• Nichols v. S. Life Ins. Co.
  584 F.2d 106· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-17
  The court held that material misrepresentations or omissions in an insurance application regarding the insured's health justify the insurer's avoidance of the policy.
• Stevens v. Diamondhead Corp.
  529 F.2d 456· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-29
  The court held that the defendant owed no greater duty than the construction contractor, and under the circumstances, no reasonable jury could find a breach of duty that caused the accident.
• Jonathan Woodner Co. v. Aetna Ins. Co.
  442 F.2d 754· D.C. Cir.· 1971-01-11
  The court held that the insurer improperly paid unearned premiums to its agent instead of the policyholder, despite the policyholder having canceled the agent.
• Am. Fire & Indem. Co. v. Lancaster
  415 F.2d 1145· 8th Cir.· 1969-09-15
  An insurance company cannot avoid a policy based on an agent's knowledge of a misrepresentation if the agent had actual or apparent authority to solicit applications, and a non-fraudulent misrepresentation does not void a policy unless it is material and either warranted or incor
• Sperry Rand Corp. v. Hill
  356 F.2d 181· 1st Cir.· 1966-01-18
  The court held that the plaintiff was estopped from denying authorship of the article due to his unreasonable silence, barring recovery under the New York privacy statute for damages after advertising began. Punitive damages for libel were also denied.
• United States v. Sparre
  339 F.2d 495· 4th Cir.· 1964-12-14
  The court held that the defendants' conviction for violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act was affirmed because they waived the requirement to prove knowledge of the baited area, and sufficient evidence existed for conviction.
• Sunshine Grain Co. v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co.
  270 F.2d 777· 5th Cir.· 1959-10-09
  The court held that the insurance policy did not cover the manlift and refused to reform the policy because the mistake was not mutual and was a mistake of law, not fact.
• MacHado v. Mortg. Inv. Found., Inc.
  15 Fla. Supp. 134· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1959-03-17
  The Machados sued to invalidate a mortgage executed by Henry O'Brien and his wife to Mortgage Investment Foundation, Inc. (through Deal Realty of Florida, Inc.). The court found the mortgage was fraudulently executed and declared it null and void while preserving the underlying p
• Canadian Indem. Co. v. Tacke
  257 F.2d 342· 9th Cir.· 1958-07-03
  A predated insurance policy is valid even if the loss occurred before the policy was agreed upon, provided the insured's agent was unaware of the loss at the time of agreement.
• Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp. v. United States
  249 F.2d 183· 5th Cir.· 1957-11-01
  The court held that even if the agency relationship was incorrectly found, the undisputed evidence showed that a proper inquiry would have revealed facts putting the appellant on notice of the car's likely illegal use, thus affirming the denial of remission.
• Maher v. Klein
  7 Fla. Supp. 106· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1954-02-16
  In this equity action to cancel a usurious note and mortgage, the court found the underlying loan violated Florida usury laws but held that the Dobkins, as subsequent purchasers with only constructive notice of the usury, could enforce the note for principal but not for post-matu
• Hall v. Ayoub Super Mkt.
  5 Fla. Supp. 15· Fla. Industrial Comm'n· 1953-09-10
  Dr. Patterson sought recovery for treating an employee severely burned in a work accident. The insurance carrier denied liability because Dr. Patterson's written report was submitted more than 20 days after treatment ended. The Florida Industrial Commission held that the timely r
• Hunt v. Jack Ivey Buick Co.
  4 Fla. Supp. 195· Fla. Industrial Comm'n· 1953-06-20
  This case addresses whether an insurance carrier is liable for an injured employee's medical treatment expenses and attorney fees when the employee's physician failed to submit timely medical reports. The court found the carrier liable, imputing knowledge of the employee's contin
• Kistler v. Gingles
  171 F.2d 912· 8th Cir.· 1949-01-18
  The court held that the defendants failed to comply with the Arkansas Limited Partnership Act's requirement for actual cash contributions at the time of filing the certificate and affidavit, thus they could not claim limited liability.
• Buder v. Denver Nat. Bank
  151 F.2d 520· 8th Cir.· 1945-10-08
  The court held that the defendants, through their conduct and representations, were equitably estopped from asserting their claims to the stock, and that the plaintiff's equitable lien was superior.
• In re 4500 N. Hermitage AVE. Apts. Corp. Cloverdale State Bank v. Schweers
  118 F.2d 857· 7th Cir.· 1941-03-20
  The court held that the appellant bank acquired the bonds subject to all defenses because it, along with other parties involved, had notice of defects in the title and did not provide valuable consideration.