In Pari Delicto

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

• O'Halloran v. Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP
  969 So. 2d 1039· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-05-04 ·cited 4×
  A bankruptcy trustee appealed the trial court's dismissal of claims against PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) for professional malpractice and other torts arising from PWC's advisory services to a bankrupt company. The appellate court reversed, holding that the claims were preserved i
• Moecker v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc.
  144 F. Supp. 2d 1291· M.D. Fla.· 2001-04-04 ·cited 4×
  The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendations, denying some motions for summary judgment while granting others, particularly concerning antitrust claims under the Sherman Act and Florida law.
• Turner v. Anderson
  704 So. 2d 748· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-01-28 ·cited 4×
  In this legal malpractice case, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment against a client who sued his former counsel for advising him to commit perjury in arbitration proceedings. The court held that while the in pari delicto doctrine bars recovery for damag
• Rothberg v. Sanford Rosenbloom and Sanford Rosenbloom
  808 F.2d 252· 3d Cir.· 1986-12-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the in pari delicto defense should be rejected in a contract action arising from illegal insider trading, aligning with the policies of federal securities laws.
• F & H Inv. Co., Inc. v. Sackman-Gilliland Corp.
  728 F.2d 1050· 8th Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury's award of damages was inconsistent with its findings and instructions, requiring a new trial on the fraudulent misrepresentation claim.
• United States v. Smith
  659 F.2d 97· 8th Cir.· 1981-09-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that public policy prevents a wrongdoer from using the courts to recover money voluntarily paid as part of an illegal contract to purchase drugs.
• Wager v. Maynard J. PRO
  603 F.2d 1005· D.C. Cir.· 1979-07-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred by not instructing the jury on the illegality of the bribery scheme as a matter of law, and that Wager failed to establish a cause of action for gross negligence, as Pro's actions constituted an intentional tort.
• Lamp Liquors, Inc. v. Adolph Coors Co.
  563 F.2d 425· 10th Cir.· 1977-09-20 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the lower court's decision, believing the majority's interpretation incorrectly nullifies a constitutional provision.
• Data Lease Fin. Corp. v. Barad
  291 So. 2d 608· Fla.· 1974-02-13 ·cited 4×
  Data Lease Financial Corporation appeals a lower court decision voiding a stock acquisition transaction with Discount Drugs shareholders (the Barads) for failure to register the securities issued in exchange, under Florida's Blue Sky Law. The Florida Supreme Court holds that tax-
• Borg Warner Corp. v. White Motor Co.
  344 F.2d 412· 5th Cir.· 1965-04-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that where a jury finds both parties negligent and their negligence proximately caused the injury, they are in pari delicto, precluding indemnity between them.
• Furrow v. Koutsky-Brennan-Vana Co.
  182 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1950-05-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that retailers who paid overceiling prices in a blackmarketing conspiracy are in pari delicto with the wholesaler and cannot recover the full amounts paid, except for those who received no lumber.
• Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., Inc. v. Allied Oil Corp.
  178 F.2d 239· 7th Cir.· 1949-12-02 ·cited 4×
  A complaint alleging common law fraud and deceit, based on a seller's false representations of ceiling prices, should not be dismissed even if the transactions also involved potential violations of the Emergency Price Control Act.
• Reynolds Metals Co. v. Metals Disintegrating Co., Inc.
  176 F.2d 90· 3d Cir.· 1949-06-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a party to an illegal contract, who collaborated in its formation and is in pari delicto, cannot obtain equitable relief or recover improperly paid royalties under New Jersey law.
• Gen. Mills, Inc. v. Steele
  154 F.2d 367· 5th Cir.· 1946-01-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that where an illegal contract is fully executed and both parties are in pari delicto, courts will not intervene to allow one party to recover from the other.
• Townsend v. NEW York Cent. R. Co.
  141 F.2d 483· 7th Cir.· 1944-03-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that plaintiffs bore the burden of proving they did not receive minimum wages, and that the Illinois statute regarding tips did not apply to this situation.
• Burton v. McMillan
  52 Fla. 228· Fla.· 1906-06-01 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed an ejectment judgment where the plaintiff McMillan sought to recover property conveyed to him by the Burtons. The court held that because the deed was executed as consideration for compounding a felony—an illegal transaction—the defendants could
• Katz v. Frank, Weinberg & Black, P.L.
  268 So. 3d 773· Fla. 4th DCA· 2019-01-30 ·cited 3×
  A Florida appellate court reversed an award of a participation fee to a law firm, holding that neither the referring attorney (Katz) nor his former firm could enforce a contingent fee participation agreement because they failed to comply with Florida Bar Rule 4-1.5(f)(2), which r
• John Hancock-Gannon Joint Venture II v. McNULLY
  800 So. 2d 294· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-10-31 ·cited 3×
  A homeowner sued an unlicensed roofing contractor for damage caused by substandard roof repairs. The court reversed in part, holding that the unlicensed contractor cannot enforce his contract and therefore cannot assert contractual defenses, and that the homeowner may pursue stat
• Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Crist
  855 F.2d 1326· 8th Cir.· 1988-08-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that Wal-Mart acted reasonably in believing the agent had apparent authority to offer a guaranteed premium, but the agreement was illegal and unenforceable due to misrepresentation of payroll figures to state regulators. Parties were found in pari delicto, leaving
• Whitelock v. Geiger
  368 So. 2d 372· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-02-13 ·cited 3×
  The court held that when both parties participate in a fraudulent scheme, the court will leave them where it finds them, voiding any related obligations.
• Silverman v. Osborne Register Co.
  D.D.C.· 1946-06-20 ·cited 3×
  The court held that an agreement to secure a government contract by adding a percentage markup to the bid price is illegal and void as against public policy.
• Neiman v. Provident Life & Accident Ins.
  217 F. Supp. 2d 1281· S.D. Fla.· 2002-08-26 ·cited 2×
  A disability insurance policy is unenforceable as a matter of public policy if it indemnifies a claimant for loss of income derived from illegal activity, even if the claimant also suffers from a disability.
• 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.
• Bontkowski v. First Nat'l Bank OF Cicero
  998 F.2d 459· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's civil RICO claim was time-barred by the four-year statute of limitations, and equitable tolling and in pari delicto defenses did not apply.
• Kan. City Cmty. Ctr. v. Heritage Indus., Inc.
  972 F.2d 185· 8th Cir.· 1992-07-23 ·cited 2×
  A contract for architectural and engineering services entered into by an unlicensed entity is unenforceable under Missouri law, and the unlicensed entity cannot recover under quantum meruit.
• Somerset Importers, Ltd. v. Continental Vintners
  790 F.2d 775· 9th Cir.· 1986-05-28 ·cited 2×
  Contracts for grape purchases entered into after January 1, 1977, that do not provide for a final price to be set on or before January 10 following delivery are illegal and unenforceable, regardless of whether a party is considered part of a protected class.
• Dudley v. Stoneman
  653 F.2d 125· 4th Cir.· 1981-07-10 ·cited 2×
  A plaintiff who admits to falsifying a report cannot recover under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, even if acting under orders, as they are in pari delicto.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Aroneck
  643 F.2d 164· 4th Cir.· 1981-02-19 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment for the FDIC on the promissory note, but vacated and remanded the attorney fee award for reconsideration.
• Mathers Fund, Inc. v. The Colwell Co.
  564 F.2d 780· 7th Cir.· 1977-11-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a plaintiff investment company is not entitled to rescission of a stock sale under Section 47(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, even if a technical violation occurred, when the transaction was fair, not overreached, and rescission would contravene the
• Miller & LUX v. Anderson
  318 F.2d 831· 9th Cir.· 1963-06-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the beneficiaries of the trust, not the corporation itself, are the real parties in interest and have the right to sue for breaches of fiduciary duty by the trustees who controlled the corporation.
• Commercial Ins. Co. of Newark v. Watson
  261 F.2d 143· 10th Cir.· 1958-10-31 ·cited 2×
  A statutory motor vehicle dealer's bond protects against all fraudulent conduct by the dealer, not just losses sustained by purchasers, and the bond is effective from the date of its issuance, covering fraud consummated thereafter.
• Reconstr. Fin. Corp. v. Foust Distilling Co.
  204 F.2d 343· 3d Cir.· 1953-04-20 ·cited 2×
  The Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) cannot maintain a suit for treble damages under Section 205(e) of the Emergency Price Control Act because the buyer, Defense Supplies Corporation (DSC), was not a 'purchaser for use or consumption other than in the course of trade or b
• Comet Theatre Enters., Inc. v. Cartwright
  195 F.2d 80· 9th Cir.· 1952-03-14 ·cited 2×
  A party who voluntarily pays for services rendered by an unlicensed contractor cannot recover the money paid, even if the contract was illegal, absent proof of defective services or other harm.
• Va. Dare Transp. Co., Inc. v. Norfolk S. Bus Corp.
  176 F.2d 354· 4th Cir.· 1949-08-04 ·cited 2×
  A party cannot recover for rights surrendered under an illegal contract if they have been restored to their original position and suffered no substantial loss.
• S. Wild Olive, LLC v. Total Maint. Servs., LLC
  387 So. 3d 1254· Fla. 5th DCA· 2024-05-17 ·cited 1×
  South Wild Olive, LLC appeals the trial court's denial of attorney's fees under section 57.105(1), Florida Statutes, against Total Maintenance Services, LLC and its counsel for raising a legally unsupported breach of contract claim. The appellate court reversed, holding that the
• Perry v. Turner
  365 So. 3d 1222· Fla. 2d DCA· 2023-06-30 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court affirmed a trial court's decision to deny a man's counterclaim for equitable relief. The court held that the man could not recover assets he transferred to his former partner because he did so to evade creditors, specifically his ex-wife for child support, thu
• Fabricant v. Roebuck
  89 F. Supp. 978· S.D. Fla.· 2001-05-21 ·cited 1×
  The court held that counterclaims against class members who are in default or who received benefits in excess of premiums paid are legally insufficient because these individuals are excluded from the class definition. The court also held that a counterclaim for unjust enrichment
• Hadley v. EF Hutton & Co., Inc.
  707 F. Supp. 509· M.D. Fla.· 1989-03-13 ·cited 1×
  The court denied summary judgment on most issues, finding material facts in dispute, but granted summary judgment for the plaintiff on the statute of limitations defense as to negligence and conversion claims.
• De Larrea v. Golden Yacht Charters, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-08-18
  The court recommended granting in part and denying in part the motion to strike affirmative defenses, treating some as denials and upholding others.
• ARC Global Invs. II, LLC v. Digit. World Acquisition Corp.
  Del. Ch.· 2024-09-16
  The Delaware Court of Chancery held that ARC Global Investments II, LLC (ARC) partially prevailed on its breach of contract claim against Digital World Acquisition Company (DWAC) and its directors. The court determined the correct conversion ratio for Class B common stock to Clas
• Oasis Cap., LLC v. Nason Yeager Gerson Harris & Fumero, P.A.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-04-04
  The court held that a stay of the current litigation pending resolution of a separate SEC action against the plaintiff was not warranted.
• Pilot Corp. v. Abel
  Del. Ch.· 2023-12-13
  The Court of Chancery granted Pilot Corporation's motion to strike the affirmative defenses of unclean hands and in pari delicto asserted by the Berkshire Defendants, finding they lacked the requisite nexus to Pilot's contractual claims. The Court also denied the Berkshire Defend
• A & E Bail Bonds, Inc. v. Sutton
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2023-04-06
  The Delaware Superior Court granted Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment and denied Plaintiffs' motion. The court held that the 2014 Agreement was illegal and void ab initio because it violated Delaware statutes requiring licensure for financial interests in bail bonds
• Vyas v. Polsinelli, PC
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-05-18
  The court held that the defendants' motion to dismiss should be denied because the in pari delicto defense was not apparent from the face of the complaint and the negligent misrepresentation claim met the pleading standards.
• Pearson v. Deutsche Bank AG
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-03-29
  The court held that the in pari delicto defense and aiding and abetting claims could not be dismissed at the pleading stage due to disputed facts and sufficient allegations of knowledge and assistance, respectively.
• PB Legacy, Inc. v. Am. Mariculture, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-01-06
  The court denied defendants' oral motion for judgment as a matter of law on certain issues, and entered judgment consistent with prior orders and a jury verdict on various claims.
• Columbus Life Ins. Co. v. [Unknown]
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2021-02-15
  The Superior Court granted in part and denied in part Columbus Life's motions to dismiss counterclaims and strike affirmative defenses. The court dismissed counterclaims for declaratory judgment based on waiver and estoppel, and for promissory estoppel, finding that such claims c
• Cont'l 332 Fund, LLC v. Kozlowski
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-03-13
  The court held that Gregory Hilz's RICO claim fails for lack of predicate acts, but his fraud and conspiracy claims survive. The court also denied a motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding punitive damages and excluded certain expert testimony.
• Steven B. Katz, P.A. v. Anthony C. Vitale, P.A.
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2019-01-30
  An appeal concerning whether a law firm and an attorney could enforce a participation fee agreement in a qui tam case. The court reversed the trial court's award of the participation fee to the law firm, finding that neither party complied with Florida Bar Rule 4-1.5(f)(2) requir
• Korotki v. C.A. No. N15C-07-164 CCLD WCC Hiller & Arban, LLC
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2017-05-23
  The Delaware Superior Court denied in part and granted in part motions for summary judgment in a legal malpractice action. The court found that claims against one attorney, Mr. Arban, were dismissed due to lack of expert testimony and minimal involvement. Claims regarding damages