Indispensable Party

1,075 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 32 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• McKINNEY v. The Missouri-Kansas-Texas R.R. Co. & Bhd. of Ry. & S.S. Clerks
  240 F.2d 8· 10th Cir.· 1956-12-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a returning serviceman's seniority rights are determined by the collective bargaining agreement in effect at the time of his service, not enhanced beyond what he would have had.
• Trinity Universal Ins. Co. v. Smithwick
  222 F.2d 16· 8th Cir.· 1955-05-02 ·cited 8×·via Necessary And Indispensable Parties
  The court held that the surety bond protected the subcontractor, and the surety could not limit its liability by contract or raise defenses not timely asserted. The statutory penalty and attorney fees were properly awarded.
• In re Adoption of a Minor
  214 F.2d 844· D.C. Cir.· 1954-05-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the father was permanently deprived of custody under the Florida decree, allowing adoption without his consent, and that the trust was irrevocable and did not need to be terminated.
• Warfield v. Marks
  190 F.2d 178· 5th Cir.· 1951-07-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Sohio Petroleum Company was an indispensable party, thus defeating federal diversity jurisdiction and requiring dismissal of the action.
• Baxter Labs., Inc. v. Don Baxter, Inc.
  186 F.2d 511· C.C.P.A.· 1951-01-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that an opposer's election to proceed under R.S. § 4915 requires dismissal of the appeal from the inter partes decision, but the appeal from the Commissioner's ex parte decision denying registration remains with the court. The court reasoned that an opposer has no
• Prince v. Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization
  185 F.2d 578· 6th Cir.· 1950-11-17 ·cited 8×
  A person subject to a deportation order is entitled to judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act, and the district court erred in dismissing the petition solely on the grounds that the APA did not apply.
• McARTHUR v. Rosenbaum Co. of Pittsburgh
  180 F.2d 617· 3d Cir.· 1950-03-07 ·cited 8×
  A lease clause granting a 'first refusal' to make a new lease is unenforceable if it is too ambiguous to determine the parties' intent or the specific terms of the offer.
• Barron-Gray Packing Co. v. Kings-Land
  171 F.2d 576· D.C. Cir.· 1948-10-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the opposer in a Patent Office trade-mark opposition proceeding is a proper but not an indispensable party to a subsequent § 4915 action against the Commissioner of Patents alone.
• Paper Container MFG. Co. v. Dixie Cup Co.
  170 F.2d 333· 3d Cir.· 1948-08-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Paper Container, despite assigning its patent application to RFC as security, retained sufficient interest to be considered an 'applicant' under R.S. § 4915 and thus a real party in interest entitled to bring suit.
• Young v. Garrett
  159 F.2d 634· 8th Cir.· 1947-02-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs leave to file amended complaints, considering the delay, prior proceedings, and potential prejudice.
• Tex. Pac. Coal & OIL Co. v. Mayfield
  152 F.2d 956· 5th Cir.· 1946-01-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the lower court erred in realigning parties for jurisdictional purposes, as the Malone defendants were not indispensable plaintiffs and their interests were antagonistic to the appellant.
• Klumb v. Roach
  151 F.2d 374· 7th Cir.· 1945-10-26 ·cited 8×
  Failure to join an indispensable party, such as an assignee with a recorded interest, within the statutory period under § 4915 deprives the court of jurisdiction to hear the case.
• Hoover Co. v. COE
  144 F.2d 514· D.C. Cir.· 1944-07-10 ·cited 8×
  The District Court lacks jurisdiction under R.S. § 4915 to review intermediate Patent Office decisions regarding interference proceedings when the ultimate right to a patent cannot be determined.
• Sloan v. Sloan
  21 Fla. 589· Fla.· 1885-06-01 ·cited 8×
  This case concerns a lawsuit to remove a cloud on title to real estate. The court reversed the lower court's decision because necessary parties, specifically the heirs or a properly appointed executor/administrator of a deceased party (Hall), were not included in the suit.
• Santiago v. Sunset Cove Invs., Inc.
  988 So. 2d 10· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-02-01 ·cited 7×
  Santiago appeals an order enforcing a final judgment requiring him to convey real property to Sunset Cove Investments, Inc. However, Santiago had already conveyed the property to a third party, Chris P. Tsokos, who was not a party to the lawsuit and thus not bound by the judgment
• In re Est. OF Pamela Jane Andreas Stisser. Lowell W. Andreas & David L. Andreas v. Vernon L.E. Stisser, Jr.
  932 So. 2d 400· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-04-07 ·cited 7×
  The probate court erred in denying the cotrustees' motion to quash service of process because it lacked personal jurisdiction over the cotrustees and the trust res.
• Walker v. President OF THE Senate
  658 So. 2d 1200· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-08-11 ·cited 7×
  Individual legislators are not proper parties to an action seeking a declaration of rights under a statute, and they are immune from civil suits for legislative acts.
• 1800 Atl. Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. 1800 Atl. Developers
  569 So. 2d 885· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-11-13 ·cited 7×
  The court affirmed a temporary injunction preserving the status quo but remanded because an indispensable party (the lessee) was not joined in the proceeding seeking to enjoin performance of a contract.
• Feinberg v. Naile
  561 So. 2d 1307· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-05-29 ·cited 7×
  Homebuyers appealed the trial court's denial of their motion to elect to proceed in equity seeking rescission of a home purchase rather than pursuing damages against the original builder. The appellate court held that plaintiffs had the right to elect their remedy and pursue resc
• Sylvester v. Lou Emma Sylvester
  557 So. 2d 599· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-01-31 ·cited 7×
  A trial court cannot make a binding determination regarding a party's ability to pay alimony by relying on assets held in an irrevocable spendthrift trust without joining the trustee and contingent remainder beneficiaries as indispensable parties.
• Lone Star Indus., Inc. v. Redwine
  757 F.2d 1544· 5th Cir.· 1985-04-22 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the dissolved corporation, OKC, was not an indispensable party to the action because it no longer existed as a legal entity and its obligations had devolved upon the Trust. The court also reversed the dismissal for failure to state a claim.
• Laycock v. Kenney
  270 F.2d 580· 9th Cir.· 1959-09-01 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the Treasury regulations concerning gold are within the statutory authority granted by the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 and that the Act itself is a constitutional exercise of Congress's power to regulate the value of money.
• Tomas v. Sandler
  406 So. 3d 1089· Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-03-26 ·cited 6×
  A hospital's negligent credentialing claim requires a presuit affidavit with specific details about the administrative standard of care and supporting facts; the State of Florida is not an indispensable party where the statute of limitations bars any claim against it, even if pro
• Wallace v. Keldie
  249 So. 3d 747· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-06-13 ·cited 6×
  A trial court has inherent authority to dismiss an action with prejudice based on fraud on the court when clear and convincing evidence demonstrates that a party has provided false testimony concerning matters directly bearing on the central issues of the case. Fraud on the court
• Gaspar's Passage v. Racetrac Petroleum, Inc.
  243 So. 3d 492· Fla. 2d DCA· 2018-04-04 ·cited 6×
  A trial court violates procedural due process and abuses its discretion when it rules on a discovery cutoff issue that was not properly noticed for hearing and served on the opposing party. A trial court must conduct a prejudice analysis under Binger v. King Pest Control before e
• TWO Islands Dev. Corp. v. Clarke
  157 So. 3d 1081· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-02-25 ·cited 6×
  Two Islands Development Corporation and related entities appealed from a trial court's temporary injunction prohibiting them from constructing a paver sidewalk on residential property lots. The appellate court vacated and remanded the injunction, holding that the owner and develo
• Bjarne Frydenlund Nielsen v. Pavlo Joannou
  835 So. 2d 1219· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-01-24 ·cited 6×
  Bjarne Nielsen appeals a default judgment entered against him for failure to comply with discovery orders in a specific performance action brought by Pavlo Joannou to enforce a real property sales contract. The appellate court reversed the default, finding the trial court's order
• Lake Lucerne Civic Ass'n v. Dolphin Stadium Corp.
  801 F. Supp. 684· S.D. Fla.· 1992-07-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that homeowner associations have standing for injunctive relief but not compensatory damages, and denied motions to dismiss based on indispensable parties and Eleventh Amendment immunity, while granting in part motions to strike allegations previously adjudicated.
• State v. Glasser
  622 So. 2d 1003· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-07-31 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Department of Education challenged a trial court's declaration that statutes limiting school districts' nonvoted discretionary millage authority were unconstitutional. The court affirmed, holding that Florida's Constitution grants school districts express authority to
• Allman v. Wolfe
  592 So. 2d 1261· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-02-07 ·cited 6×
  The Allmans appealed the dismissal of the Mintrones from a lawsuit brought by Wolfe over the rescission of an assignment of an agreement for deed. The court reversed, holding that the Mintrones, as parties to the original transaction and holders of legal title to the property, ar
• State OF S.D. v. Bourland
  949 F.2d 984· 8th Cir.· 1991-11-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Tribe's treaty-based right to regulate non-Indian hunting and fishing on land conveyed for the Oahe Dam project has not been abrogated by Congress. However, the court vacated the district court's ruling on tribal jurisdiction over nonmember Indians as it w
• Vesper Moore v. Ashland OIL, Inc.
  901 F.2d 1445· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the magistrate correctly dismissed the federal action for failure to join indispensable parties, as their absence would prejudice existing parties and the court could not fashion an adequate judgment.
• Spierer v. City OF N. Miami Beach
  560 So. 2d 1198· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-03-06 ·cited 6×
  A class action challenging the City of North Miami Beach's water utility deposit policy was dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action. The appellate court reversed, holding that while the original complaint was defective, it was susceptible to amendment and
• The Sindia Expedition, Inc. v. The Wrecked & Abandoned Vessel
  895 F.2d 116· 3d Cir.· 1990-02-08 ·cited 6×
  An admiralty in rem action seeking title to a vessel is not barred by the Eleventh Amendment, even if the state claims an interest in the vessel, and the state is not an indispensable party if it can protect its interests and its absence does not create substantial risk of incons
• Sokaogon Chippewa Community v. State OF Wis.
  879 F.2d 300· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-24 ·cited 6×
  The district court erred in dismissing the suit against non-federal defendants based on the United States being an indispensable party, as the analysis under Rule 19(b) did not support such a conclusion.
• Stotler & Co. v. Able
  870 F.2d 1158· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying Abie's motion for contempt against Stotler, Dalton, Kimmelman, and Collins, nor in denying Stotler's motion for Rule 11 sanctions against Abie.
• Nottingham v. Gen. Am. Commc'ns Corp.
  811 F.2d 873· 5th Cir.· 1987-03-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in awarding damages and partial rescission, nor in its evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or damage calculations, and affirmed the judgment.
• Pulitzer-Polster v. Pulitzer
  784 F.2d 1305· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the federal suit for failure to join indispensable parties, as their absence could impair their ability to protect their interests and subject the defendant to inconsistent obligations.
• City OF Hallandale v. Gulfstream Park Racing Ass'n, Inc.
  440 So. 2d 1328· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-11-30 ·cited 6×
  The City of Hallandale appealed a dismissal of its complaint seeking declaratory relief and injunction challenging a state statute exempting parimutuel permit holders from local building and zoning regulations. The court reversed, holding that the city was entitled to proceed wit
• Moore v. Leisure Pool Serv., Inc.
  412 So. 2d 392· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-03-17 ·cited 6×
  Moore appeals a judgment awarding Leisure Pool Service a mechanic's lien and damages for breach of contract over a swimming pool construction dispute. The court affirmed the damages award for the unpaid pool sweep but reversed the mechanic's lien foreclosure because Moore's spous
• Loxahatchee River Env't Control Dist. v. Martin Cnty. Little Club, Inc.
  409 So. 2d 135· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-01-27 ·cited 6×
  ENCON appeals a summary judgment entered against it in a crossclaim filed by Little Club against the Bank over escrow certificates of deposit. The court reversed, holding that ENCON was an indispensable party to the crossclaim and should have been named and given notice before su
• Rapoport v. Banco Mexicano Somex
  668 F.2d 667· 2d Cir.· 1982-01-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the dismissal for failure to join indispensable parties was proper, but the subsequent injunction was invalid due to lack of jurisdiction.
• Exxon Corp. v. United States
  655 F.2d 1112· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1981-06-30 ·cited 6×
  The court exercised its supervisory powers to consolidate litigation concerning oil pricing regulations in the District of Columbia action, staying proceedings in the Texas action.
• Curtis v. United Transp. Union
  648 F.2d 492· 8th Cir.· 1981-05-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2) does not toll the statute of limitations, and Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b) does not create an exception to this rule.
• Daniels v. Vann
  396 So. 2d 723· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-02-11 ·cited 6×
  In a stockholder derivative suit, the plaintiff sued another stockholder on behalf of a corporation but failed to name the corporation as a party defendant. The trial court denied repeated motions to dismiss for failure to join an indispensable party and rendered judgment. The ap
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Doug Neal Mgmt. Co.
  620 F.2d 1133· 6th Cir.· 1980-04-08 ·cited 6×
  The court should enforce the National Labor Relations Board's order because substantial evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge's findings of anti-union bias and unfair labor practices.
• Foss v. Mansell
  378 So. 2d 802· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-12-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the amendment to the complaint, seeking attorney's fees as an assignee, related back to the original filing date and was not barred by the statute of limitations.
• Gertner v. Hosp. Affiliates Int'l, Inc.
  602 F.2d 685· 5th Cir.· 1979-09-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the formation of an oral joint venture agreement and a fiduciary relationship, and the applicability of the statute of frauds was not clear under Te
• Ramada Inns, Inc. v. Rosemount Mem'l Park Ass'n
  598 F.2d 1303· 3d Cir.· 1979-05-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the State of New Jersey's agencies, the Attorney General and cemetery board, were not indispensable parties for diversity jurisdiction purposes, allowing the suit to proceed in federal court.
• Carter v. Heard
  593 F.2d 10· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the pro se litigant was not entitled to injunctive or declaratory relief because he failed to demonstrate an actual controversy or threatened irreparable injury.