In Pari Delicto

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

• Geovera Specialty Ins. v. Hutchins
  611 F. App'x 34· M.D. Fla.· 2011-12-21
• Alan B. Garfinkel, P.A. v. Scott A. Mager, Mager Law Grp., P.A.
  57 So. 3d 221· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-12-23
  Garfinkel, a law firm, sought enforcement of a settlement agreement provision prohibiting Mager, a former managing partner, from representing parties suing Garfinkel. The trial court voided the provision as violating public policy and Rule 4-5.6 of the Florida Bar. The appellate
• Edenfield v. Martin Cnty.
  583 So. 2d 1097· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-07-31
  The court reversed summary judgment for the county in a whistleblower retaliation action, holding that the plaintiff's affidavit raised a material factual dispute about adverse personnel action and that the Whistleblower's Act protects even those who previously participated in wr
• Nat'l Petrochemical Co. OF Iran v. The M/T Stolt Sheaf
  930 F.2d 240· 2d Cir.· 1991-04-11
  The court held that a party cannot recover on contracts that are part of a scheme to violate U.S. law, and that a party's knowledge of illegality is imputed from its agent.
• Bubis v. Blanton
  885 F.2d 317· 6th Cir.· 1989-09-14
  The court held that the plaintiff lacked standing to bring an antitrust claim because his alleged business interest was illegal under state law due to non-disclosure, and he had no interest in the liquor license itself.
• Mark v. FSC Sec. Corp.
  870 F.2d 331· 6th Cir.· 1989-03-16
  The court held that the seller failed to meet its burden of proof to establish an exemption from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 or Rule 506 of Regulation D, entitling the purchasers to rescission under Ohio law.
• Palmer W. Collins and H. L. Clark, III v. Pioneer Title Ins. Co.
  629 F.2d 429· 6th Cir.· 1980-07-16
  A title insurance policy is voidable if the insured, through their agent, fails to disclose material facts increasing the risk, and the insured cannot recover from the agent if they are in pari delicto.
• Olson Farms, Inc. v. Safeway Stores
  649 F.2d 1370· 10th Cir.· 1979-11-08
  The Court adheres to its prior panel opinion, which is in accord with a recent Supreme Court decision on antitrust contribution.
• Goller v. Nat'l Life
  554 F.2d 1349· 5th Cir.· 1977-07-01
  The court held that the sale of stock by Cuthbertson to the plaintiff was a nonissuer transaction exempt from registration under California Blue Sky Law, and thus the plaintiff was not entitled to rescission.
• Louis Dreyfus Corp. v. Landon V. Butler
  496 F.2d 806· 6th Cir.· 1974-04-26
  The court held that claims to set aside property transfers were barred by limitations or laches, and that the wife was entitled to offset her losses against any debt owed to the plaintiff.
• Crawford v. Colby Broad. Corp. & Julian Colby
  387 F.2d 796· 7th Cir.· 1967-11-29
  The court held that a plaintiff's complaint is not facially vulnerable to the in pari delicto defense simply by entering into an agreement with an unlawful restraint.
• D. C. Transit Sys., Inc. v. Garman
  301 F.2d 568· D.C. Cir.· 1962-03-29
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying judgment N.O.V. or exoneration, as the jury's findings supported judgments against the appellants and precluded indemnity claims due to the absence of comparative negligence.
• Kermath Mfg. Co. v. Brownell
  222 F.2d 577· 6th Cir.· 1955-06-07
  A party participating in a fraudulent transaction cannot use the transaction's illegality as a defense against the Alien Property Custodian's seizure of enemy-owed funds.
• United States v. Murtaugh
  190 F.2d 407· 4th Cir.· 1951-07-17
  The court held that purchasers who were aware of illegal overcharges are not barred from restitution, and the real estate broker involved in the scheme is liable.
• United States v. Teed
  185 F.2d 561· 9th Cir.· 1950-11-17
  The court held that the victim of extortion, who paid money under duress and threat of criminal prosecution, is not barred from recovering the money, even if he violated other laws.
• Dine v. Edwards
  158 F.2d 17· 7th Cir.· 1946-10-16
  The court held that the allegations in Count 2, seeking damages for conversion, were sufficient to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
• Painter v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co
  S.D. Fla.· 1923-03-24
  A widow sought to cancel a release she executed on her husband's life insurance policy, alleging the insurance company's agents fraudulently represented that other insurers had agreed to pay their policies in full and that a pending lawsuit over her husband's vital organs would b