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

• Kamhi v. Mannie Cohen
  512 F.2d 1051· 2d Cir.· 1975-03-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the former wife was a necessary party under Rule 19(a) and that the action should be dismissed in equity and good conscience under Rule 19(b) due to her absence.
• Brigham v. Dade Cnty.
  305 So. 2d 756· Fla.· 1974-11-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an applicant for a zoning change is not an indispensable party to a petition for writ of certiorari seeking to review the administrative action, especially when notice was provided.
• The Tewa Tesuque v. Rogers C. B. Morton
  498 F.2d 240· 10th Cir.· 1974-06-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Pueblo is an indispensable party and that the federal officials are protected by sovereign immunity.
• Klein v. The Comm'r OF Patents OF the United States
  474 F.2d 821· 4th Cir.· 1973-02-06 ·cited 12×
  The denial of a motion to dissolve a patent interference proceeding by the Patent Office is not final agency action reviewable by federal courts under the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Inv. Corp. OF S. Fla. v. Fla. Thoroughbred Breeders Ass'n, Inc.
  256 So. 2d 227· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-01-06 ·cited 12×
  The Florida Thoroughbred Breeders Association sought a declaratory judgment challenging the Board of Business Regulation's authority to allow direct competition between parimutuel licensees. The trial court initially dismissed the complaint but then, on a late petition for rehear
• Smith v. Capt. James M. Campbell
  450 F.2d 829· 9th Cir.· 1971-10-11 ·cited 12×
  A district court retains habeas corpus jurisdiction if the petitioner and custodian were within its territorial jurisdiction at the time the petition was filed, even if the petitioner is subsequently removed from the district.
• Shaughnessy v. Metro. Dade Cnty.
  238 So. 2d 466· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-08-11 ·cited 12×
  Shaughnessy challenged a Zoning Appeals Board's approval of an unusual use permit for a water and sewage utility plant on neighboring property. The court affirmed the denial of her certiorari petition, holding that the Board complied with notice requirements, due process, and act
• Mfr's. Nat'l Bank OF Detroit v. Hartmeister
  411 F.2d 173· 10th Cir.· 1969-04-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an employee acting as an agent for his employer's wholly-owned corporations, with respect to properties owned by those corporations, is not acting as a real estate broker and is therefore not subject to real estate licensing requirements. The court also held t
• Weber v. The Zoning Bd. OF Appeals OF the City OF W. Palm Beach
  206 So. 2d 258· Fla. 4th DCA· 1968-01-25 ·cited 12×
  Helen S. Weber challenged a zoning variance granted by the West Palm Beach Zoning Board of Appeals by filing a certiorari petition in circuit court. The circuit court dismissed the petition, holding it lacked jurisdiction because the City of West Palm Beach was not named as a res
• HOT OIL Serv., Inc. v. Hall
  366 F.2d 295· 9th Cir.· 1966-09-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, as neither federal question nor diversity jurisdiction was present.
• Martha v. Dessar
  353 F.2d 468· 9th Cir.· 1965-11-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trust agreement, despite the trustor's retained powers, created a valid trust and was not a mere agency, thus the post-death disposition provisions were not subject to the statute of wills.
• The Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y OF the United States v. United States
  331 F.2d 29· 1st Cir.· 1964-04-27 ·cited 12×
  A matured life insurance policy's cash value is considered a debt subject to federal tax lien enforcement, and substituted service under 28 U.S.C. § 1655 is sufficient for quasi in rem jurisdiction over the insurer.
• Sawyer v. Pioneer Mill Co., Ltd.
  300 F.2d 200· 9th Cir.· 1962-03-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appeal should be granted and the case dismissed without prejudice because the action had become moot after the merger was completed.
• George v. Mitchell
  282 F.2d 486· D.C. Cir.· 1960-06-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Fulbright Amendment grants standing to 'interested persons' to seek judicial review of Walsh-Healey Act determinations, and that multiple bids submitted by a single dealer in response to one invitation can be aggregated into a single contract for the purpo
• MacARTHUR Liquors, Inc. v. Palisades Citizens Ass'n
  265 F.2d 372· D.C. Cir.· 1959-03-19 ·cited 12×
• Holt v. King
  250 F.2d 671· 10th Cir.· 1957-12-16 ·cited 12×
  The federal court has jurisdiction over a quiet title action involving property rights, even if it requires interpreting a will, as long as it does not interfere with the probate court's administration of the estate.
• Abel v. Brayton Flying Serv., Inc.
  248 F.2d 713· 5th Cir.· 1957-10-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its judgment, as the contract was not usurious and the individual Brayton was not an indispensable party. The appellee's cross-assignment of error was also dismissed.
• William v. Bybee
  95 So. 2d 529· Fla.· 1957-05-29 ·cited 12×
  A plumbing subcontractor sought to foreclose a mechanic's lien against a property owner without joining the general contractor as a defendant. The Florida Supreme Court held that the contractor need not be joined as an indispensable party in enforcement actions under the 1935 Mec
• Haby v. Stanolind OIL & GAS Co.
  228 F.2d 298· 5th Cir.· 1955-12-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the oil and gas lease terminated due to cessation of production, and the lessee's actions did not constitute a ratification or revival of the lease.
• Ward v. Deavers
  203 F.2d 72· D.C. Cir.· 1953-03-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that rescission was not possible due to the absence of an indispensable party (Deavers), and that the trial court's findings of fraud were not adequately supported by the record.
• Trueman Fertilizer Co. v. Larson
  196 F.2d 910· 5th Cir.· 1952-05-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint because the United States is an indispensable party that has not consented to be sued, and venue was improper.
• United States ex rel. J. Deavers v. Missouri
  171 F.2d 961· 5th Cir.· 1949-01-18 ·cited 12×·via Necessary And Indispensable Parties
  The court held that the veteran and his employer are the only necessary parties in a suit to compel compliance with seniority provisions of the Selective Service Act, and that inter-employee disputes over seniority should be resolved by the Adjustment Board.
• Young v. Anderson
  160 F.2d 225· D.C. Cir.· 1947-01-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the action was properly dismissed because the United States, as an indispensable party, had not consented to be sued.
• Ainsworth v. Barn Ballroom Co., Inc.
  157 F.2d 97· 4th Cir.· 1946-07-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the suit was in substance against the United States, which had not consented to be sued, and therefore the district court lacked jurisdiction.
• Jarvis v. Shackelton Inhaler Co.
  136 F.2d 116· 6th Cir.· 1943-06-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Postmaster General's fraud order was not supported by substantial evidence and was void, and that the district court correctly granted injunctive relief.
• Armour & Co. of Del. v. B. F. Bailey, Inc.
  132 F.2d 386· 5th Cir.· 1942-12-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the corporation could not be held liable for the individual's debt, as the conveyance was valid and the corporation was not the individual's alter ego.
• Reconstr. Fin. Corp. v. Teter
  117 F.2d 716· 7th Cir.· 1941-01-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in quashing the summons and dismissing the action against the C. T. C. Investment Company because it was dissolved and could not be sued.
• Nelson v. Haisley
  39 Fla. 145· Fla.· 1897-01-01 ·cited 12×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a partition decree, holding that necessary parties, such as heirs or devisees of a deceased co-tenant, must be properly before the court before adjudication. The court emphasized that an executor is not a proper party to represent title unless s
• Citibank v. Villanueva
  174 So. 3d 612· Fla. 4th DCA· 2015-09-09 ·cited 11×
  A foreclosure judgment is void if the fee simple title holder is not joined as an indispensable party, and such a judgment must be vacated regardless of delay.
• Dep't OF Revenue v. Yambert
  883 So. 2d 881· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-10-01 ·cited 11×
  The Department of Revenue appealed a trial court's award of section 57.105 attorney's fees to Matthew Yambert in paternity and child support actions. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that DOR's actions did not meet the statutory standards for frivolous
• Malloy v. Gunster, Yoakley, Valdes-Fauli & Stewart, P.A.
  850 So. 2d 578· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-06-13 ·cited 11×
  Petitioners sought a writ of certiorari to overturn a trial court order abating their state court action against law firm Gunster Yoakley and attorney Duffy pending resolution of a related bankruptcy proceeding. The Florida appellate court granted the petition, finding the trial
• The City OF ST. Petersburg v. Marelli
  728 So. 2d 1197· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-03-12 ·cited 11×
  The Board of Adjustment of St. Petersburg sought certiorari review of a circuit court decision that had granted certiorari and invalidated a parking variance granted to Compro Corporation for a laundromat and restaurant. The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's decision,
• Michael Paul Shienvold/Attorney Ad Litem for Daniel Habie and Alexandra Habie v. Habie
  627 So. 2d 1203· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-12-01 ·cited 11×
  A guardian ad litem for children in a dissolution action appealed the dismissal with prejudice of a motion to set aside the final judgment and settlement agreement. The court held that a guardian ad litem has standing to seek such relief in limited circumstances, but reversed the
• ST. Martin's Episcopal Church v. Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc.
  613 So. 2d 108· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-01-27 ·cited 11×
  A trust beneficiary sued a securities dealer for negligence and churning (excessive trading) after settling with the trustee's estate. The trial court dismissed the case on standing grounds, but the appellate court reversed, holding that a trust beneficiary has standing to sue th
• Adams v. Terrel H. Bell
  711 F.2d 161· D.C. Cir.· 1983-06-10 ·cited 11×
• Kaiser v. Local NO. 83
  577 F.2d 642· 9th Cir.· 1978-06-30 ·cited 11×
  The employer is not an indispensable party in an action against a union for breach of its duty of fair representation, and a union can be liable even if the employer is not.
• Lister v. Comm'rs Court
  566 F.2d 490· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-17 ·cited 11×
  The court held that a special master who previously testified for a party should not have been appointed, and that plaintiffs failed to establish the jurisdictional amount for federal question jurisdiction, requiring remand.
• Glenny v. Am. Metal Climax, Inc.
  494 F.2d 651· 10th Cir.· 1974-03-19 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the smelter's owner and operator, Blackwell Zinc, was an indispensable party under Rule 19(b), and thus the district court did not err in dismissing the action for want of an indispensable party.
• Humble OIL & Ref. Co. v. Martin
  298 F.2d 163· 5th Cir.· 1961-12-29 ·cited 11×
  A life tenant or trustee cannot grant an oil lease that prejudices a vested remainderman's rights, and a remainderman can sue a lessee for waste even if other remaindermen have granted leases.
• Croton Watch Co., Inc. v. Laughlin
  208 F.2d 93· 2d Cir.· 1953-11-12 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the acting collector's refusal to permit importation of watches marked 'Nivada Grenchen' was unlawful, and a preliminary injunction should have been granted against him. However, the denial of a preliminary injunction against the trademark owner was affirmed.
• Blackmar v. Guerre
  190 F.2d 427· 5th Cir.· 1951-07-11 ·cited 11×
  The court held that venue for a suit against the Civil Service Commission, an indispensable party, must be in the District of Columbia where it is domiciled, absent specific statutory authority to sue elsewhere.
• Chance v. Buxton
  170 F.2d 187· 5th Cir.· 1948-11-03 ·cited 11×
  The court held that Mrs. West and Oliver were not indispensable parties whose presence would destroy diversity jurisdiction.
• Picking v. Pa. R. Co.
  152 F.2d 753· 3d Cir.· 1945-10-03 ·cited 11×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, clarifying that the New York defendants were not indispensable parties and rejecting arguments based on amended complaint exhibits and an illegible summons.
• Smith v. Bruster
  151 So. 3d 511· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-10-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the fraud claim based on the statute of limitations, as the accrual date depends on when the plaintiff discovered or should have discovered the fraud, and that the addition of an indispensable party relates back to the origi
• Stevens v. Tarpon BAY Moorings Homeowners Ass'n Inc.
  15 So. 3d 753· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-07-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the other unit owners were indispensable parties who should have been joined in the lawsuit.
• Shana English v. Bankers Tr. Co. OF Cal., N.A.
  895 So. 2d 1120· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-01-26 ·cited 10×
  A foreclosure sale is void if the fee simple owner is not joined as a party, and a subsequent foreclosure action is necessary to enforce the mortgagee's rights.
• State v. S.W. Anderson, Inc.
  744 So. 2d 1098· Fla. 1st DCA· 1999-10-06 ·cited 10×
  In this inverse condemnation case, the Florida Department of Transportation appealed a trial court judgment awarding compensation to S.W. Anderson, Inc. for alleged loss of access to its property resulting from construction of a new bridge and realignment of State Road 79. The ap
• Antonelli v. Smith
  556 So. 2d 1132· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-12-05 ·cited 10×
  Reformation of a gratuitous conveyance is available when the grantee has changed position in material reliance on the conveyance, but the action must be dismissed without prejudice when indispensable parties—the current owner of the benefited property and the nominal grantor—have
• McCLENDON v. United States
  885 F.2d 627· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Tribe did not waive its sovereign immunity by initiating the 1972 suit, and the lease agreement did not contain an express waiver, thus the action against the Tribe was barred. Furthermore, the Tribe is an indispensable party, requiring dismissal of the ac
• Jicarilla Apache Tribe v. Hodel
  821 F.2d 537· 10th Cir.· 1987-06-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Dome's motion to intervene was untimely and its independent action was properly dismissed due to the Tribe's indispensable status and immunity, and its motion to amend for a refund was barred by the Tucker Act.