In Pari Delicto

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

• Luzinski v. Peabody & Arnold LLP (In Re Gosman)
  382 B.R. 826· S.D. Fla.· 2007-12-13 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's dismissal of the malpractice claim, holding that the in pari delicto doctrine barred the trustee's action because the debtor's intentional fraud was at least as culpable as the law firm's alleged negligence. The court also found the trust
• Ross v. Bolton
  904 F.2d 819· 2d Cir.· 1990-05-30 ·cited 12×
  A clearing firm can use the in pari delicto defense to bar an investor's suit if the investor bears substantially equal responsibility for the transactions and barring the suit does not significantly interfere with the enforcement of securities laws.
• Berner v. Lazzaro
  730 F.2d 1319· 9th Cir.· 1984-04-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the in pari delicto doctrine cannot be the sole basis for dismissing a federal securities law claim unless the investor is equally responsible for their injury.
• Leda Mae Symons v. Mueller Co.
  526 F.2d 13· 10th Cir.· 1975-10-29 ·cited 12×
  A manufacturer held liable under strict liability theory is considered in pari delicto with a party whose active negligence contributed to the injury, and thus is not entitled to indemnity from that party.
• Columbia Pictures Indus., Inc. v. Am. Broad. Cos., Inc.
  501 F.2d 894· 2d Cir.· 1974-07-03 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a clear likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm, and that serious questions warranted further litigation.
• Gaines v. Carrollton Tobacco Bd. OF Trade, Inc.
  386 F.2d 757· 6th Cir.· 1967-12-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the damages claim, as there were disputed facts regarding compromise and settlement, and any agreement waiving future antitrust damages is invalid as against public policy.
• Perma Life Mufflers, Inc. v. Int'l Parts Corp.
  376 F.2d 692· 7th Cir.· 1967-04-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the in pari delicto defense is not applicable when a party with coercive power forces another into an illegal contract, and that a conspiracy is not required to prove certain antitrust violations.
• Mariam v. Katiba Cook and Audrey M. Katiba
  190 So. 2d 309· Fla.· 1966-09-21 ·cited 12×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the District Court of Appeal, holding that J. J. Katiba is equitably estopped from denying petitioners' title to real property based on his 1942 deed conveying the property to their predecessor, even though he later acquired an after-acquired in
• Allied Mut. Cas. Corp. v. Gen. Motors Corp. & Tom Parker
  279 F.2d 455· 10th Cir.· 1960-06-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that summary judgment was improper because the insurer may be able to show that its insured was only secondarily liable for claims arising from a defective automobile, entitling it to indemnity from the manufacturer and dealer who were primarily liable.
• Kulla v. E.F. Hutton & Co., Inc.
  426 So. 2d 1055· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-01-25 ·cited 11×
  Richard Kulla sued E.F. Hutton and its agent Herbert Wilson for fraud after purchasing stock based on insider tips about a merger that never occurred, losing substantial money. The trial court dismissed the complaint on the ground that Kulla acted in pari delicto (in equal fault)
• Spector v. Ahrenholz
  107 So. 2d 34· Fla. 3d DCA· 1958-11-25 ·cited 11×
  Lloyd and Estelle Spector appealed the dismissal of their suit to recover property they had deeded to L. T. Ahrenholz, claiming the deed was for security only. The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that because the Spectors made the conveyance partly to defraud creditors, the
• Crist v. Dickson Welding, Inc.
  957 F.2d 1281· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury instructions on reasonable reliance were erroneous because they failed to consider the knowledge of Dickson Welding's agent, Maddox, and that Dickson Welding failed to preserve its appeal of the dismissal of its third-party claim against A&A.
• E. F. Hutton & Co., Inc. v. Melford Berns
  682 F.2d 173· 8th Cir.· 1982-06-30 ·cited 10×
• Xaphes v. Shearson
  508 F. Supp. 882· S.D. Fla.· 1981-02-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the equitable defense of 'in pari delicto' did not bar the plaintiff's securities fraud claim because the plaintiff was not a 'tippee' with a duty to disclose, and the defendants' alleged conduct constituted a 'double fraud'.
• Malamphy v. Real-Tex Enters., Inc.
  527 F.2d 978· 4th Cir.· 1975-10-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defense of in pari delicto was properly submitted to the jury because the plaintiffs were culpable participants in the fraudulent enterprise.
• Schetter v. Schetter
  279 So. 2d 58· Fla. 4th DCA· 1973-06-08 ·cited 10×
  A grantor who conveyed property fraudulently may recover that property from a non-innocent grantee obtained through undue influence or duress, even though the grantor lacked clean hands, when the grantee is the more culpable party and the parties are not in pari delicto.
• Kan. City Operating Corp. v. Durwood
  278 F.2d 354· 8th Cir.· 1960-05-16 ·cited 10×
  A party cannot recover indemnity for losses stemming directly from its own fraudulent conduct or conspiracy, even if the indemnity agreement itself is facially valid.
• In re Escheat of Monies Deposited in United States Dist. Court for E. Dist. of Pa.
  187 F.2d 131· 3d Cir.· 1951-01-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the United States District Court has exclusive jurisdiction over the bribe money, and the Pennsylvania state court lacked jurisdiction to hear a suit against the sovereign without consent.
• Wiand v. Waxenberg
  611 F. Supp. 2d 1299· M.D. Fla.· 2009-03-19 ·cited 8×
  The court granted summary judgment for the defendant on constructive fraud claims for return of principal and on unjust enrichment claims for transfers from specific accounts, but denied summary judgment on other claims due to disputed issues of material fact.
• Lewis B. Freeman for NorthAmerican Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.
  865 So. 2d 543· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-12-19 ·cited 8×
  A receiver for a Ponzi scheme corporation (NorthAmerican) and its individual customers appealed the dismissal of their complaint against Dean Witter Reynolds, a broker-dealer employee, and a law firm. The court held that the receiver lacked standing to pursue claims on behalf of
• Feltman v. Prudential Bache Securities
  122 B.R. 466· S.D. Fla.· 1990-12-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that neither the bankruptcy trustee nor the creditors' committee has standing to bring claims that belong to specific creditors of the estate, particularly when the alleged injuries to the debtor corporations are illusory or derivative of the creditors' injuries.
• Toth v. USX Corp.
  883 F.2d 1297· 7th Cir.· 1989-08-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that USX's unilateral leave policy, even if potentially illegal under the LMRA, could not be exempted from LMRA prohibitions because it was not part of a bargained-for collective bargaining agreement and thus did not qualify for the section 302(c)(1) exception.
• Cole v. PPG Indus., Inc.
  680 F.2d 549· 8th Cir.· 1982-06-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that unregistered securities sold in violation of the Arkansas Securities Act are subject to rescission, and that the seller could not claim exemptions or defenses when the statutory requirements were not met. The court also affirmed the enforceability of a persona
• Wager v. Maynard J. PRO
  575 F.2d 882· D.C. Cir.· 1976-10-14 ·cited 8×
  A judgment on the pleadings is improper if the complaint raises genuine issues of material fact, even if the court believes the opposing party is unlikely to prevail.
• Adams v. Gen. Dynamics Corp.
  535 F.2d 489· 9th Cir.· 1976-04-15 ·cited 8×
  A claim for noncontractual indemnity against the United States is barred if the United States has no underlying liability to the injured party.
• Wald Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  426 F.2d 1328· 6th Cir.· 1970-06-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the National Labor Relations Board's findings that the company violated Sections 8(a)(5) and (1) of the NLRA, despite acknowledging mutual bad faith between the parties.
• Sunshine Packers, Inc. v. Am. CAN Co.
  395 F.2d 86· 5th Cir.· 1968-05-22 ·cited 8×
  A party cannot use an antitrust violation as a defense to avoid paying a debt incurred for goods received, especially when the party induced the transaction.
• The Fid. & Cas. Co. OF NEW York v. T. P. Herndon & Co.
  196 So. 2d 196· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-12-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial, affirming the judgment for the subcontractor.
• Pa. Water & Power Co. v. Consol. Gas Elec. Light & Power Co. of Baltimore
  209 F.2d 131· 4th Cir.· 1953-12-16 ·cited 8×
  A party to an illegal antitrust agreement cannot recover treble damages under the antitrust laws for losses stemming from that agreement, even if they later repudiated it.
• Danebo Lumber Co., Inc. v. Koutsky-Brennan-Vana Co.
  182 F.2d 489· 9th Cir.· 1950-05-17 ·cited 8×
  A party who pays money under a contract that is malum in se (inherently wrong), such as a conspiracy to violate a federal criminal statute, cannot recover that money if they are in pari delicto (equally at fault) with the other party.
• MGM Constr. Servs. Corp. v. Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. OF Am.
  57 So. 3d 884· Fla. 3d DCA· 2011-03-02 ·cited 7×
  MGM Construction Services Corp., an unlicensed subcontractor, appealed a summary judgment that rendered its subcontracts unenforceable based solely on violation of Miami-Dade County's licensing ordinance. The appellate court reversed, holding that courts must apply a flexible, mu
• Solano v. a Navas Party Prod., Inc.
  728 F. Supp. 2d 1334· S.D. Fla.· 2010-07-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding whether Francisco Navarrete qualifies as an employer under the FLSA, precluding summary judgment on that issue. The court also found that Plaintiff has not abandoned his federal minimum wage claim and can poten
• Farmland Indus. v. Frazier-Parrott Commodities, Inc.
  871 F.2d 1402· 8th Cir.· 1989-04-13 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgments, holding that the evidence was insufficient to establish Heinold's direct liability and that the jury instructions adequately covered Farmland's claims.
• Zurad v. Lehman Bros. Kuhn Loeb Inc. & William Curry
  757 F.2d 129· 7th Cir.· 1985-03-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the broker's failure to disclose material market information, including recent price fluctuations and trading suspensions, constituted negligent misrepresentation under Illinois law, and that the plaintiff was entitled to recover damages.
• Partridge v. TWO Unknown Police Officers OF the City OF Houston
  751 F.2d 1448· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the complaint failed to state a claim for deliberate indifference to a prisoner's serious medical needs, as the alleged facts did not demonstrate a strong likelihood of suicide.
• Hayden v. Orison F. McDONALD
  742 F.2d 423· 8th Cir.· 1984-08-28 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's refusal to consider tax consequences of plaintiffs' investments in determining recovery.
• Fogarty v. Sec. Tr. Co.
  532 F.2d 1029· 5th Cir.· 1976-06-07 ·cited 6×
  Summary judgments were improper because an unresolved issue of material fact remained regarding the parties' intent at the time of the agreement, which is critical for determining federal jurisdiction, the applicability of the in pari delicto defense, and potential fraud.
• Chaykin v. Kant
  327 So. 2d 793· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-02-03 ·cited 6×
  Chaykin sought to foreclose a $50,000 mortgage on the Kant family home. The trial court found that the mortgage was part of a scheme to defeat a potential IRS tax lien, involved a circular cash transaction with no real consideration, and dismissed the foreclosure suit based on th
• United States v. Iovenelli
  403 F.2d 468· 7th Cir.· 1968-11-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the return of bribe money to a convicted briber is not a matter of judicial discretion, and the briber forfeits any right to the money.
• Berman v. Riverside Casino Corp.
  323 F.2d 977· 9th Cir.· 1963-10-28 ·cited 6×
  A party cheated in a licensed Nevada gambling establishment can recover their losses in a civil suit, despite the general common law hostility to gambling recovery.
• In re Abc-Federal OIL & Burner Co., Inc.
  290 F.2d 886· 3d Cir.· 1961-04-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that no binding contract was formed because essential terms remained unresolved, but the bankrupt estate was entitled to restitution for improvements made to the other party's property.
• Sw. Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Crown Coach Co.
  178 F.2d 628· 8th Cir.· 1949-12-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that both parties were passively negligent and jointly liable, entitling the paying party to contribution under Texas statute.
• Mandeville Island Farms, Inc. v. Am. Crystal Sugar Co.
  159 F.2d 71· 9th Cir.· 1947-01-14 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, adopting the reasoning of the lower court but clarifying the appropriate standard for interstate commerce effects under the antitrust laws.
• Battles v. Braniff Airways, Inc.
  146 F.2d 336· 5th Cir.· 1944-12-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statute of limitations barred the claim for unpaid premiums and that the defendant was not bound by the prior assessment judgment because it was not a party by representation. The court affirmed the denial of recovery on both claims.
• General Accident v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
  132 F.2d 122· 2d Cir.· 1942-11-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim for indemnification against the manufacturer should not have been dismissed on summary judgment, as disputed issues of fact remained regarding the manufacturer's negligence and the user's reliance.
• Snohomish Cnty. v. Great N. Ry. Co.
  130 F.2d 996· 9th Cir.· 1942-10-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the County was liable for damages caused by its negligent road construction and maintenance, and that the Railway Company was entitled to reimbursement for claims paid due to its passive negligence.
• Standard Oil Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  129 F.2d 363· 7th Cir.· 1942-06-12 ·cited 6×
  A taxpayer cannot deduct a judgment paid to the government arising from criminal misconduct or fraud against the government, as it violates public policy. Prior tax years are closed, precluding retroactive adjustment of depreciation calculations.
• Kvaerner Constr., Inc. v. Am. Safety Cas. Ins. Co.
  847 So. 2d 534· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-04-17 ·cited 5×
  Kvaerner Construction appeals a summary judgment dismissing its claims against American Safety Casualty Insurance Company for breach of a performance bond issued for an unlicensed subcontractor. The court affirmed, holding that Kvaerner cannot indirectly enforce an unenforceable
• Jewel TEA Co., Inc. v. Associated Food Retailers OF Greater Chicago, Inc.
  331 F.2d 547· 7th Cir.· 1964-04-27 ·cited 5×
  A union agreement with business competitors to restrict retail market operating hours constitutes an unreasonable restraint of trade violating the Sherman Act, and is not protected by the labor exemption.
• Ford v. Caspers
  128 F.2d 884· 7th Cir.· 1942-06-17 ·cited 5×
  Where parties engage in a fraudulent transaction to injure another, neither law nor equity will interfere to relieve either party against the other from the consequences of their misconduct.