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

• Worley v. The Dade Cnty. Sec. Co.
  52 Fla. 666· Fla.· 1906-06-01 ·cited 35×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a foreclosure decree on equitable grounds because the trial court proceeded to final judgment after one of the defendant parties died without properly reviving the suit against his legal representatives, as required by equity practice.
• Allen v. Abner W. Gordon
  429 So. 2d 369· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-03-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to rebut the presumption of joint tenancy with right of survivorship, and the son's withdrawal of funds constituted conversion.
• Int'l Travelers Cheque Co. v. Bankamerica Corp. & Bank of Am. Nat'l Tr. & Sav. Ass'n
  660 F.2d 215· 7th Cir.· 1981-08-26 ·cited 34×
  A national bank can only be sued in the district where it is established, and initiating an opposition proceeding before the Patent and Trademark Office does not waive this venue protection. Furthermore, a party cannot appeal a dismissal based on failure to join an indispensable
• Starlie Lomayaktewa v. Hathaway
  520 F.2d 1324· 9th Cir.· 1975-07-25 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the Hopi Tribe is an indispensable party to the action to void the lease, and because it cannot be joined due to sovereign immunity, the action must be dismissed.
• Fontenelle v. Omaha Tribe OF Nebraska
  430 F.2d 143· 8th Cir.· 1970-08-28 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the United States is an indispensable party and has waived sovereign immunity under 25 U.S.C. § 345 for this quiet title action concerning allotted lands, and that the Omaha Tribe's corporate charter also waives its immunity. The court affirmed the district co
• Kerr v. Compagnie de Ultramar & Transmar Corp.
  250 F.2d 860· 2d Cir.· 1958-01-08 ·cited 34×
  A federal court has the power to dismiss a non-diverse, dispensable defendant to retain diversity jurisdiction, and failure to do so when no prejudice results is an abuse of discretion.
• Copra v. José A. Suro
  236 F.2d 107· 1st Cir.· 1956-07-06 ·cited 34×
  The denial of a temporary injunction was not an improvident exercise of discretion because of doubts regarding federal jurisdiction under § 301 and the potential for the controversy to be resolved in a prior, more appropriate case.
• Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations v. Seitz
  193 F.2d 456· 10th Cir.· 1951-12-18 ·cited 34×
  The United States is not an indispensable party to an action brought by Indian Nations to recover possession and establish title to their lands, allowing the Nations to proceed without the United States' joinder.
• Panos Giannakos v. M/V Bravo Trader
  762 F.2d 1295· 5th Cir.· 1985-06-17 ·cited 33×
  The court held that a district court cannot enforce a settlement agreement if it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the underlying dispute, as jurisdiction cannot be conferred by the parties' consent or conduct.
• Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Holmes
  352 So. 2d 1233· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-11-29 ·cited 33×
  Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company appeals the trial court's order allowing a plaintiff to join the personal representative of a deceased defendant's estate after the 90-day substitution period expired under Florida Civil Procedure Rule 1.260(a)(1). The court held that the
• Plains Growers, Inc. v. Ickes-Braun Glasshouses, Inc.
  474 F.2d 250· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-09 ·cited 33×
  The court held that a plaintiff has an absolute right to voluntary dismissal without prejudice against a defendant who has not filed an answer or motion for summary judgment, even if the action remains pending against other defendants. However, the court affirmed the district cou
• Sheoah Highlands, Inc. v. Daugherty
  837 So. 2d 579· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-02-14 ·cited 32×
  A condominium unit owner sued the association to enforce the declaration of condominium by removing screened enclosures built on common property by other unit owners. The trial court ordered removal of two enclosures and awarded attorney's fees, but the appellate court reversed t
• Greenspun v. DEL E. Webb Corp.
  634 F.2d 1204· 9th Cir.· 1980-12-29 ·cited 32×
  The court held that personal jurisdiction should have been exercised over two defendants, but the plaintiff failed to comply with the demand requirement of Fed.R.Civ.P. 23.1, and the Foundation was not an indispensable party.
• Haas v. Jefferson Nat'l Bank OF Miami Beach
  442 F.2d 394· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-22 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding Charles H. Glueck an indispensable party and dismissing the action for lack of complete diversity.
• In re LAS Colinas, Inc.
  426 F.2d 1005· 1st Cir.· 1970-05-14 ·cited 32×
  The court held that adopting proposed findings verbatim should be limited to extraordinary technical cases and that the $2,000,000 mortgage was void for excessive security and procedural unfairness.
• Chiodo v. Gen. Waterworks Corp.
  380 F.2d 860· 10th Cir.· 1967-07-03 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' objections to jury instructions were insufficient to preserve the issue for appeal, and that the rescission claim was properly dismissed for failure to join an indispensable party and for election of remedies. The statute of limitations also ba
• Fibreboard Paper Prods. Corp. v. E. BAY Union OF MacHinists
  344 F.2d 300· 9th Cir.· 1965-02-03 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the trial court properly struck the second affirmative defense asserting collateral estoppel based on a prior NLRB decision, as the contract termination issue was not essential to the NLRB's final ruling and the NLRB's initial decision was not final.
• J. C. Frell and Jeanne v. Frell
  154 So. 2d 706· Fla. 3d DCA· 1963-06-25 ·cited 32×
  The appellants J.C. Frell and his wife challenged an order setting aside property conveyances made by Thomas C. Frell to them, which the trial court found were fraudulent transfers made to defeat his obligations to pay alimony and support to his ex-wife Nancy Joan Frell. The appe
• Skokomish Indian Tribe v. France
  269 F.2d 555· 9th Cir.· 1959-06-26 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court had federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1331, and that the State of Washington had not waived its sovereign immunity to suit in federal court.
• Greenberg v. Giannini
  140 F.2d 550· 2d Cir.· 1944-01-31 ·cited 32×
  Service of process on a corporation outside the district is invalid in a removed shareholder derivative action if such service would have been invalid in the original state court action.
• The Sarasota Ice v. Lyle & Co.
  53 Fla. 1069· Fla.· 1907-01-01 ·cited 32×·via Necessary And Indispensable Parties
  The appellate court reversed a lower court's foreclosure decree because one of the defendants was not properly served and thus not subject to the court's jurisdiction. The court also noted issues with an amended answer and cross-bill that were not properly disposed of.
• Harris v. Pernsley
  820 F.2d 592· 3d Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 31×
  The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of the District Attorney's motion to intervene as of right in a prison conditions lawsuit. The court held that the District Attorney did not possess a sufficient legal interest to intervene, as his duties did not encompass th
• Switzer Bros., Inc. v. Chicago Cardboard Co.
  252 F.2d 407· 7th Cir.· 1958-02-11 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the dismissal of the patent infringement complaint for lack of indispensable parties did not divest the court of jurisdiction over the intervenor's antitrust counterclaim, and that a prior Sixth Circuit decision was res judicata.
• U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Bevans
  138 So. 3d 1185· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-05-21 ·cited 30×
  U.S. Bank appeals an order vacating its mortgage foreclosure judgment and exempting the property purchaser from the Bank's senior lien. The court holds that a purchaser at a junior lienholder's foreclosure sale takes title subject to senior liens, and that a failure to record a l
• Standard OIL Co. OF Cal. v. Perkins
  347 F.2d 379· 9th Cir.· 1965-06-14 ·cited 30×
• Ogden River Water Users' Ass'n v. Weber Basin Water Conservancy
  238 F.2d 936· 10th Cir.· 1956-10-27 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the suit against federal officers was, in substance, a suit against the United States, which had not consented to be sued, and thus the district court lacked jurisdiction.
• Hirst v. Gertzen
  676 F.2d 1252· 9th Cir.· 1982-05-10 ·cited 29×
  The majority opinion reversed the trial court's decision, allowing evidence of a deputy sheriff's prior acts to be admissible for proving gross negligence and proximate cause in a civil rights action, despite the dissenting judge's view that such evidence was irrelevant and preju
• MacKlin v. Butler
  553 F.2d 525· 7th Cir.· 1977-04-15 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the district court erred by granting summary judgment without adequate notice and opportunity for the appellants to respond, and by dismissing the case for failure to join indispensable parties without proper consideration of Rule 19.
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. McLEAN Trucking Co.
  525 F.2d 1007· 6th Cir.· 1975-11-26 ·cited 29×
  The EEOC is not barred from bringing an action to enforce Title VII rights based on an employee's charge, even if the employee later settled a private action or accepted an arbitration award, and unions not named in the initial EEOC charge can be joined if necessary for interpret
• Sellers v. The Regents OF the Univ. OF Cal.
  432 F.2d 493· 9th Cir.· 1970-09-17 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the complaint, refusing to convene a three-judge court, as there was no genuine threat of irreparable harm or chilling effect on First Amendment rights to warrant injunctive relief.
• Simons v. Vinson
  394 F.2d 732· 5th Cir.· 1968-05-03 ·cited 29×
  The court held that sovereign immunity should not be permitted to nullify a mandatory constitutional command and that the United States Courts should be open to allow appellants to prove their ownership of property.
• Mrs. Louise Bisbey Stewart v. United States
  242 F.2d 49· 5th Cir.· 1957-03-01 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the action was properly dismissed against the United States and the individual defendants due to lack of jurisdiction and improper service, and that the United States was an indispensable party.
• Dimick v. RAY
  774 So. 2d 830· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-12-27 ·cited 28×
  A minority shareholder appealed a summary judgment dismissing his complaint against majority shareholders and corporations for alleged violations of the Florida Business Corporation Act. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying t
• Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Dan A. Ditmore, M.D., & Sea Island, P.C.
  729 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 28×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted on claims of deceit and unfair practices, as genuine issues of material fact existed regarding misrepresentation and state of mind. The dismissal of the declaratory relief count was affirmed, but the restitution count wa
• The First Jersey Nat'l Bank v. Dome Petroleum Ltd. & Dome Energy Ltd.
  723 F.2d 335· 3d Cir.· 1983-12-19 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the definition of 'intent' for the purpose of an indemnification exclusion clause in an arm's length contract should be the standard used in civil cases, not the heightened standard used in insurance cases to protect innocent third parties.
• The Fid. & Cas. Co. of N.Y. v. Reserve Ins. Co.
  596 F.2d 914· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-14 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1345 but could assert diversity jurisdiction after dismissing the United States as a party. The court also affirmed the trial court's finding that the truck was an 'automobile' and not 'mobile equipment,
• Bermudez v. The United States Dep't OF Agric.
  490 F.2d 718· D.C. Cir.· 1973-10-10 ·cited 28×
  The federal government is liable for retroactive food stamp benefits that were wrongfully denied due to state administrative error, and the class action determination by the district court is affirmed.
• Homestake Mining Co. & Homestake-N.M. P'rs v. Mid-Continent Exploration Co.
  282 F.2d 787· 10th Cir.· 1960-09-07 ·cited 28×
  The court held that Section 11 ore was not a capital contribution to New Mexico Partners and modified the judgment to require Mid-Continent to maintain ore reserves. It also affirmed the denial of a constructive trust for fiduciary breaches, finding no conflict of interest or unf
• Koepke v. Fontecchio
  177 F.2d 125· 9th Cir.· 1949-09-21 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the premises were decontrolled housing accommodations under the Housing and Rent Acts and that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment.
• De Korwin v. First Nat. Bank of Chicago
  156 F.2d 858· 7th Cir.· 1946-08-02 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the parties plaintiff sought to dismiss were not indispensable, and the plaintiff should have been granted leave to amend his complaint to cure jurisdictional defects.
• Town of Okemah v. United States
  140 F.2d 963· 10th Cir.· 1944-02-18 ·cited 28×
  The United States is an indispensable party to condemnation proceedings for restricted Indian lands, and the Act of April 12, 1926, does not waive this requirement for state court actions.
• Fulwood v. Clemmer
  295 F.2d 171· D.C. Cir.· 1961-08-14 ·cited 27×
  The District Court erred in denying leave to file the petition, and the case should be remanded for further proceedings.
• Glickstein v. SUN Bank/Miami, N.A.
  922 F.2d 666· 11th Cir.· 1991-01-28 ·cited 26×
  The district court erred in dismissing the complaint for lack of standing and failure to exhaust probate remedies; Glickstein's subsequent appointment as personal representative cures the capacity defect, and the probate exception and exhaustion doctrines do not bar the action.
• Int'l Union v. Brock
  816 F.2d 761· D.C. Cir.· 1987-04-24 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Secretary's interpretation of 'employment' under the Trade Act, excluding paid leave, conflicts with congressional intent and is invalid. The court reversed the finding that the Secretary violated the Veterans' Act of 1972.
• GAF Corp. v. Transamerica Ins. Co.
  665 F.2d 364· D.C. Cir.· 1981-09-03 ·cited 26×
  The court held that attorneys' fees can be awarded as a condition of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2), but remanded for a specific explanation of the award amount to ensure it only covers costs rendered useless by the dismissal.
• Yamamoto v. Kazuo Omiya
  564 F.2d 1319· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-28 ·cited 26×
  The district court erred in striking equitable relief and the lis pendens notice before determining liability, as equitable remedies are available for Section 14(a) violations and premature balancing of equities is improper.
• Transok Pipeline Co. v. Maxwell Darks
  565 F.2d 1150· 10th Cir.· 1977-11-14 ·cited 26×
  The court held that federal jurisdiction under 25 U.S.C. § 357 extends to non-Indian parties with interests in land also held by restricted Indians, and that pendent jurisdiction was properly exercised over state law claims against these non-Indian parties. The court also affirme
• Tryforos v. Icarian Dev. Co.
  518 F.2d 1258· 7th Cir.· 1975-07-03 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the dismissal of the shareholder derivative action should be without prejudice because the corporation was an indispensable party that was never properly served, and that the award of attorney fees was improper under Illinois law.
• Va. Elec. & Power Co. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp. & Stone & Webster Eng'g Corp.
  485 F.2d 78· 4th Cir.· 1973-06-04 ·cited 26×
  A subrogor with a retained pecuniary interest can sue for the entire loss, even if the subrogee controls the litigation and would ultimately receive most of the recovery, to avoid destroying diversity jurisdiction.
• Boris v. Hamilton Mfg. Co.
  253 F.2d 526· 7th Cir.· 1958-03-27 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the plaintiffs were barred by laches from asserting their claims for patent royalties against Hamilton Manufacturing Company.