Indispensable Party

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

• Inland Fin. Corp. v. Champion Cigarette Vending Co.
  260 F.2d 243· 4th Cir.· 1958-10-16
  The court held that the plaintiff's cause of action was exclusively its own and not jointly possessed with an absent party, thus the district court erred in dismissing the suit.
• Brodsky v. The Perth Amboy Nat'l Bank
  259 F.2d 705· 3d Cir.· 1958-10-07
  The court held that the failure to join indispensable parties, specifically all co-tenants of the real estate, was fatal to the counterclaim.
• R. P. Farnsworth & Co., Inc. v. Globe Marble & Granite Corp.
  250 F.2d 636· 5th Cir.· 1958-01-03
  The court held that the trial court erred in summarily dismissing the surety without affording counsel an opportunity to be heard.
• Kennedy v. Falk
  230 F.2d 362· 7th Cir.· 1956-02-23
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the case for lack of federal diversity jurisdiction, even though the dismissal was based on an improper alignment of parties.
• Schmidt v. Humble OIL & Ref. Co.
  219 F.2d 551· 5th Cir.· 1955-03-02
  The court held that the lessor was mentally competent to execute the lease and that the statutory acknowledgment requirement for homesteads did not apply. The plaintiff's attempt to dismiss his own case after trial was also rejected.
• Welborn v. Tidewater Associated OIL Co.
  217 F.2d 509· 10th Cir.· 1954-12-13
  The court held that the plaintiff's lease, obtained through a guardian's sale of a remainder interest, did not grant immediate development rights and therefore could not be slandered by a subsequent joint lease from the life tenant and remainderman.
• Stanford v. Lunde Arms Corp.
  211 F.2d 464· 9th Cir.· 1954-03-25
  The court held that the toy cap pistol is not a 'firearm' within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1715, and therefore is mailable.
• Bekins v. Bekins VAN & Storage Co.
  210 F.2d 338· 5th Cir.· 1954-02-12
  The court held that the appellants could not use a technical claim regarding Interstate Commerce Commission approval timing to deny the appellees' ownership of stock and stock rights, as the ICC's subsequent approval validated the transaction.
• Boyd v. City State Bank
  210 F.2d 161· 10th Cir.· 1954-02-03
  The court held that the trial court correctly denied the motion to dismiss for lack of diversity and correctly directed a verdict for the bank, as the maker of the check was liable to the bank as a holder for value, even if he was an accommodation party.
• Texas v. New Mexico
  344 U.S. 906· U.S.· 1952-12-22
  The Court appointed a special master to take evidence and make recommendations on the issues, including the indispensability of the United States.
• Interstate Commerce Comm'n v. Blue Diamond Prods. Co.
  192 F.2d 43· 8th Cir.· 1951-11-05
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to enjoin the shipper and that the lessors of the trucks were indispensable parties.
• Cutting v. Bullerdick
  188 F.2d 837· 9th Cir.· 1951-05-09
  The court held that a minor not properly served with process cannot be made a party to a foreclosure action, and a nunc pro tunc order appointing a guardian ad litem does not cure the lack of jurisdiction. The court also held that a personal judgment against a party who undertook
• Money v. Wallin
  186 F.2d 411· 3d Cir.· 1951-01-10
  The court held that the Secretary of the Navy was an indispensable party, and since the subordinates sued lacked the authority to grant the requested relief, the action could not be maintained against them alone.
• Lanolin Plus Cosmetics, Inc. v. Botany Mills, Inc.
  177 F.2d 757· 3d Cir.· 1949-11-18
  The court held that the Commissioner of Patents is an indispensable party in a suit to compel trademark registration after refusal, and thus the suit could not proceed in the District of New Jersey where the Commissioner could not be served.
• Cothren v. Evans
  172 F.2d 533· 8th Cir.· 1949-02-17
  The court held that the case was properly removed to federal court because the appointed public administrator was not a necessary party and lacked a real interest in the controversy.
• Nat'l Yeast Corp. v. City of Crystal Lake
  170 F.2d 491· 7th Cir.· 1948-11-08
  The court held that the Crystal Lake Building Corporation was not an indispensable party, and therefore the District Court correctly exercised diversity jurisdiction.
• Foreman et ux. v. Mesirow
  167 F.2d 711· 5th Cir.· 1948-03-23
• Lawrence v. SUN OIL Co.
  166 F.2d 466· 5th Cir.· 1948-02-20
  The court held that Arthur E. Thomas was an indispensable party, and thus the federal court lacked jurisdiction due to lack of diversity of citizenship.
• Robinson v. Deal
  145 F.2d 382· D.C. Cir.· 1944-10-23
  The court held that because the fund at issue was in the U.S. Treasury and subject to Congressional control, the suit was one against the United States, which had not consented to be sued, thus depriving the court of jurisdiction.
• Morris v. Franklin Fire Ins. Co. of Philadelphia, PA
  130 F.2d 553· 9th Cir.· 1942-09-14
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the action for lack of diversity jurisdiction, as the non-diverse defendants were not indispensable parties and should have been realigned or dismissed.
• Pent v. Forest Hills Holding Corp.
  152 Fla. 190· Fla.· 1942-03-06
  Forest Hills Holding Corporation purchased tax certificates in Hillsborough County and paid required fees and costs to the county's special attorney. When the certificates were redeemed for less than the full amount owed, plaintiff sued the circuit court clerk for an accounting.
• Sunday Sch. Union of African Methodist Episcopal Church v. Walden
  121 F.2d 719· 6th Cir.· 1941-06-25
  The court held that the A.M.E. Church, as the beneficial owner, could sue its sub-trustee (the Union) to enforce trust duties, and that the Union trustee could be removed for mismanagement and unauthorized actions.
• State v. Bd. of Pub. Instruction for Polk Cnty.
  117 Fla. 170· Fla.· 1934-11-06
  O. J. Pope sought mandamus to compel the Polk County Board of Public Instruction to disburse salary payments exceeding the amounts appropriated in the county budget. The Florida Supreme Court held that members of the county budget commission were indispensable parties to the proc
• Fisher W. Hannum v. Int'l Agric. Corp.
  113 Fla. 150· Fla.· 1933-12-05
  The Florida Supreme Court dismissed an appeal because the trustee in bankruptcy, who was a necessary party, had not been joined in the appeal.