Indispensable Party

1,074 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Clair Rec. Ctr., Inc. v. Flynn
  897 F.2d 623· 1st Cir.· 1990-03-06
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the complaint and denying the motion to amend without proper consideration.
• Rayburn Paulk v. Braxton
  562 So. 2d 699· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-02-26
  The court held that incarceration for civil contempt was improper because the arrearage had been reduced to judgment, making incarceration an unavailable remedy, and because the order for incarceration was oral.
• Pinellas Cnty. v. Seminole Lake Country Club Ests. Homeowners Ass'n, Inc.
  555 So. 2d 883· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-12-27
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the County's motion to dissolve a temporary injunction.
• Stone's Pharmacy, Inc. v. Pharmacy Acct. Mgmt., Inc.
  875 F.2d 665· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-22
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing Stone's Pharmacy's claims under the Bulk Transfers Act and for tortious interference with contract, as PAM was not an indispensable party and the claims were not barred by the automatic stay in PAM's bankruptcy.
• N & C Props. v. Vanguard Bank & Tr. Co.
  519 So. 2d 1048· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-01-22
  N & C Properties appeals from a judgment confirming an Alabama court's decision rescinding condominium purchase agreements and awarding escrowed funds to the buyers, and approving the escrow agent's interpleader action distributing those funds in Florida. The appellate court affi
• Cobia v. Kalogridis
  518 So. 2d 356· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-12-16
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint for failure to join indispensable parties.
• Wells v. Michaud
  516 So. 2d 1066· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-12-16
  The court reversed a trial court's dismissal of a personal injury claim, holding that the dismissal was improper on both grounds cited: failure to timely prosecute and failure to serve an indispensable party.
• Int'l Surplus Lines Ins. v. City of Crystal River
  418 F.2d 1300· M.D. Fla.· 1987-12-14
  The court held that it has subject matter jurisdiction over the entire action, including the City's counterclaim against Consolidated, based on ancillary jurisdiction over a compulsory counterclaim.
• Mrs. Patsy Lewis v. Dr. Thomas M. Holden, M.D.
  821 F.2d 291· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-13
  The court held that the district court did not err in proceeding without joining the parents as indispensable parties, nor did it err in its jury instructions or voir dire.
• Britton v. United States
  54 F. Supp. 221· S.D. Fla.· 1987-03-30
• Cnty. Sanitation Dist. NO. 2 OF LOS Angeles Cnty. v. Inland Container Corp.
  803 F.2d 1074· 9th Cir.· 1986-11-04
  The court held that the District's suit seeking equitable relief was inequitable because it failed to join an indispensable party (Chino) and attempted to circumvent a mandatory arbitration clause.
• Swift v. J.A. Fruehauf
  801 F.2d 838· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-23
  The district court's order dismissing the action was clearly erroneous because it was based on the mistaken assumption that plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend their complaint had been granted.
• Rice v. Cities Sewer Serv. OF Broward Cnty., Inc.
  488 So. 2d 662· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-05-21
  The court held that the trial court erred in applying the compulsory counterclaim rule because Rice's contract claims were not logically related to the replevin action, and Pugh was not a necessary party to the compulsory counterclaim.
• Romero v. United States
  784 F.2d 1322· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-24
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the suit for lack of jurisdiction and failure to join an indispensable party, allowing the plaintiff to proceed with his constitutional challenge.
• Rechtien v. Ryder Sys.
  S.D. Fla.· 1985-08-28
  The court held that the plaintiff was not entitled to a benefit adjustment from the retirement plan because he failed to meet the required service hours and had waived his entitlement to such benefits.
• Tampa BAY CAB Co., Inc. v. Yellow CAB Co. OF Tampa, Inc.
  446 So. 2d 246· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-03-07
  The circuit court did not depart from the essential requirements of law by denying a third party's motion to intervene in a common law certiorari proceeding reviewing administrative action.
• Harriston v. Ga. Hwy. Express, Inc.
  437 So. 2d 224· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-09-14
  Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of their amended complaint for failure to join an indispensable party. The court reversed, holding that Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.190 does not require an amended complaint to be filed within twenty days after a court order authorizing an
• Citibank, N.A. v. Oxford Props. & Fin. Ltd.
  688 F.2d 1259· 9th Cir.· 1982-09-28
  The court vacated the district court's judgments, finding that the issues of fund misapplication and foreclosure validity were prematurely decided and should be determined after the rescission claim is fully resolved.
• Fredericks v. Mandel
  650 F.2d 144· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-03
  A tribal court lacks jurisdiction to condemn or grant a right-of-way over Indian trust lands because the United States is an indispensable party and the Secretary of the Interior's approval is required.
• FOX v. Perry
  382 So. 2d 1251· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-04-08
  Foxes brought suit against Perrys on a $500,000 promissory note. Perrys defended by invoking a May 1976 agreement allegedly requiring the Foxes to look solely to Lo-Te Development Corporation for satisfaction. The court reversed summary judgment, finding genuine issues of materia
• Magin L. Melendez v. Starr
  377 So. 2d 217· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-11-13
  Melendez, a former employee, filed suit seeking to enjoin Starr and Andresen from using the name "American Mat and Rubber Products" for their business. The trial court found neither party had authorization to use the name and awarded no damages to either side, but retained jurisd
• United States v. City OF McALESTER
  604 F.2d 42· 10th Cir.· 1979-08-14
  The court held that the United States was not an indispensable party to the 1903 condemnation suit because the Curtis Act authorized the condemnation of unallotted tribal lands for public improvements, and the City's uses of the easement were consistent with its purpose.
• Clarenbach v. Consolidated Parts
  600 F.2d 1039· 3d Cir.· 1979-05-29
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding no error in the denial of intervention or the grant of summary judgment.
• Zimmerman v. Civil Serv. Bd. OF the City OF Boca Raton
  366 So. 2d 24· Fla.· 1978-10-26
• Levine v. Susik
  47 Fla. Supp. 194· Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1978-07-26
  The court held that cooperative apartment purchasers may proceed as a plaintiff class alleging fraudulent misrepresentation in the sale of shares, distinguishing cooperatives from condominiums based on the unified corporate ownership structure and shared pecuniary interests. The
• Groves v. Rogers
  547 F.2d 898· 5th Cir.· 1977-02-25
  The court held that a party cannot manipulate the form of action to circumvent federal diversity jurisdiction requirements, especially when indispensable parties would destroy diversity.
• Shaw v. City OF Miami
  322 So. 2d 649· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-12-02
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in dismissing the complaint for failure to join indispensable parties.
• Broward Cnty. Health Dep't v. Martin
  307 So. 2d 220· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-01-10
  The court, in a dissenting opinion, argued that service of process on the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners was sufficient to establish jurisdiction over the Broward County Health Department.
• Valdez v. Cuna Mut. Ins. Soc'y
  272 So. 2d 185· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-01-24
  Paul Valdez appeals a summary judgment entered after trial commenced but before evidence was presented. The case involves a group life insurance policy issued by CUNA Mutual that provided loan protection, and Valdez claimed disability benefits under the policy. The court reversed
• Powers v. Mitchell
  463 F.2d 212· 9th Cir.· 1972-06-30
  The court held that the district court in Arizona lacked jurisdiction to hear the case concerning a Connecticut selective service board's induction order.
• Rilling v. Dade Cnty.
  35 Fla. Supp. 100· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1971-03-22
  In this certiorari action challenging a zoning resolution, the court dismissed the petition for failure to include an indispensable party—the property owner who received the zoning relief. The court held that a petition for writ of certiorari cannot be amended after the 30-day fi
• Campbell v. Rutkin
  243 So. 2d 435· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-01-26
  The court held that there was insufficient proof of a breach of a condition precedent in any contract between the parties.
• Fla. Air & Water Pollution Control Comm'n v. B & W Canning Co., Inc.
  35 Fla. Supp. 65· Lake Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1970-12-04
  The Florida Air and Water Pollution Control Commission sued B & W Canning Company for discharging improperly treated citrus wastes into Lake Catherine. The court rejected the defendant's motions to abate, dismiss, and for a more definite statement, finding the complaint adequatel
• United States v. Bluhm
  414 F.2d 1240· 7th Cir.· 1969-07-25
  The court held that the federal tax liens were valid encumbrances and were not discharged in the real estate tax sale because the United States, as a senior lienholder, was an indispensable party to the state court proceedings, which constituted an unconsented suit against the Un
• Griffith J. Davis v. Corrin
  417 F.2d 1157· D.C. Cir.· 1969-06-11
  The court held that the District Court had jurisdiction to appoint a conservator, and that while notice to the husband was desirable, its absence did not vitiate the proceeding. However, due to changed circumstances, the case is remanded.
• Milgram v. Bethencourt & Reyes Constr. Co., Inc.
  219 So. 2d 754· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-03-04
  The court held that the dismissal of the cause was improper because the reason for dismissal (lack of jurisdiction over indispensable parties) was cured by service while the case was still pending and before final disposition.
• de Arellano v. Jacques COE & Co.
  403 F.2d 1012· 2d Cir.· 1968-11-20
  The court held that the plaintiffs were the owners of certain securities entrusted to the defendant and were entitled to recover them.
• Nott v. Butscher
  189 So. 2d 373· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-08-16
  A Florida tax assessor appealed a circuit court's denial of a motion to dismiss a taxpayer's challenge to unequal property assessments, arguing that the Florida Railroad Assessment Board was an indispensable party. The appellate court agreed that the Railroad Assessment Board's i
• Scott v. Mico Auto Sales, Inc.
  187 So. 2d 910· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-06-14
  Sam Scott appeals the dismissal of his conversion complaint against Mico Auto Sales and its officers. The trial court ordered that Scott's wife, Julia Ann Scott, be added as an indispensable party plaintiff because title to the allegedly converted automobile was held in both thei
• John N. Newland in Bankr. for Hughes Homes, Inc. v. Wincel T. Edgar and Helen E. Edgar
  362 F.2d 911· 9th Cir.· 1966-06-08
  The district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the intervening party destroyed diversity jurisdiction and no federal question was presented.
• Har-Rich Realty Corp. v. Am. Consumer Indus., Inc.
  351 F.2d 785· D.C. Cir.· 1965-06-21
  The court held that the sale should not be disturbed due to a failure to join the purchaser, but the case should be remanded for appellant to pursue damages against the note holder.
• Gersten Constr. Co. v. The United States
  346 F.2d 973· Ct. Cl.· 1965-06-11
  The court held that the FHA's actions constituted adoption of the negotiated wage adjustment, making it binding, and that the subsequent attempt to revise the determination was void.
• Updegrave v. Reliance Nat'l Invs. Corp.
  337 F.2d 604· 9th Cir.· 1964-10-19
  The court held that Florence was not an indispensable party and that appellants ratified his fraudulent representations by retaining the benefits of the stock exchange agreement.
• Saville v. Shove
  289 F.2d 614· 5th Cir.· 1961-05-04
  The court held that the appellants' claim was barred by the statute of limitations, applying the same rule as in a prior, similar case.
• Oma C. Brown v. Bankruptcy
  288 F.2d 168· D.C. Cir.· 1961-03-16
• Glencoe Distilling Co. v. White
  286 F.2d 713· 9th Cir.· 1961-02-01
  The court held that the trial court did not err in dismissing the complaint because the relief sought was beyond the power of the Customs Collector and the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Edward Corp. OF Miami v. David M. Woolin & SON, Inc.
  113 So. 2d 252· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-06-25
  Edward Corporation sued David M. Woolin & Son, Inc. for payment under an order confirmation allegedly signed by Woolin's company. The trial court dismissed the complaint as a matter of law, finding the contract created a joint obligation between Woolin's company and the principal
• Local 259 v. LEE
  262 F.2d 228· D.C. Cir.· 1958-12-18
  The court held that the district court lacked equitable jurisdiction to enjoin administrative proceedings or compel the joinder of parties.
• Hicks v. Summerfield
  261 F.2d 752· D.C. Cir.· 1958-11-13
  The court held that the Civil Service Commissioners were indispensable parties, and the suit was properly dismissed due to the failure to substitute their successors.
• Lubin v. Chicago Title & Tr. Co.
  260 F.2d 411· 7th Cir.· 1958-11-06
  The court held that Marie Lundberg Lubin and Mollie Lubin, executrix, were not indispensable parties, and therefore, their presence did not destroy diversity jurisdiction.