Intracorporate Conspiracy Doctrine

89 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Hartley
  678 F.2d 961· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-17 ·cited 163×
  The court held that a corporation can conspire with its own officers, agents, and employees, and that sufficient evidence existed to support the convictions for conspiracy, mail fraud, and RICO violations.
• Dussouy v. Gulf Coast Inv. Corp.
  660 F.2d 594· 5th Cir.· 1981-11-05 ·cited 149×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the plaintiff a third opportunity to amend his complaint and that the complaint stated a claim for tortious interference with business and conspiracy in restraint of trade under Louisiana law.
• United States v. Computer Scis. Corp.
  689 F.2d 1181· 4th Cir.· 1982-06-16 ·cited 95×
  The court held that dismissals of indictments based on minor, non-prejudicial grand jury intrusions and the preemption of mail/wire fraud by the false claims statute were erroneous.
• Cliff Food Stores, Inc. v. Kroger, Inc.
  417 F.2d 203· 5th Cir.· 1969-10-01 ·cited 85×
  The court held that a corporation cannot conspire with its unincorporated divisions for Sherman Act Section 1 purposes, and that retail sales are generally not 'in commerce' for Robinson-Patman Act purposes. The court also found no dangerous probability of monopolization under Sh
• Novotny v. Great Am. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n
  584 F.2d 1235· 3d Cir.· 1978-08-07 ·cited 75×
  The court held that a conspiracy to deprive women of equal employment opportunities under Title VII falls within the scope of 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), and an employee discharged for advocating such rights has standing to sue.
• SUN Life Assurance Co. OF Canada v. Imperial Premium Fin., LLC
  904 F.3d 1197· 11th Cir.· 2018-09-18 ·cited 56×
  Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada sued Imperial Holdings and its affiliates for acquiring life insurance policies through an alleged fraudulent scheme involving false premium financing representations, while Imperial's subsidiary countersued alleging Sun Life breached the poli
• Stathos v. Bowden
  728 F.2d 15· 1st Cir.· 1984-02-22 ·cited 40×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict and damage award, finding no reversible error in the exclusion of evidence, jury instructions, or the award of attorney's fees, and amended the judgment for clarity.
• The Cromar Co. v. Nuclear Materials & Equip. Corp. & Atl. Richfield Co.
  543 F.2d 501· 3d Cir.· 1976-09-14 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to support a jury verdict that the defendants conspired to restrain trade in terminating the plaintiff's contract.
• Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Serv. OF Am., Inc.
  651 F.2d 122· 2d Cir.· 1981-06-03 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the plaintiffs abandoned their Section 1 claim and that the jury instruction on Section 2 monopolization was erroneous but harmless, as the plaintiffs failed to present a prima facie case.
• Int'l Railways OF Cent. Am. v. United Brands Co.
  532 F.2d 231· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-04 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the abandonment of the Tiquisate operation was not a violation of the Sherman Act, as it was based on legitimate business reasons and not an exercise of monopoly power or a prohibited joint boycott.
• Hull v. Cuyahoga Valley Joint Vocational Sch. Dist. Bd. OF Educ.
  926 F.2d 505· 6th Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 27×
  The court held that claims of discriminatory discharge are not cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 post-Patterson, but that a continuing violation theory may apply to § 1983 claims to overcome the statute of limitations. The court also reversed summary judgment for defendant Schuck
• TV Signal Co. OF Aberdeen v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co. & Nw. Bell Tel. Co.
  462 F.2d 1256· 8th Cir.· 1972-06-30 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the amended complaint sufficiently stated claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act and did not present an insuperable bar to relief, thus it should not have been dismissed.
• Garza v. City OF Omaha
  814 F.2d 553· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a jury's finding of discriminatory custom under § 1983 collaterally estops the district court from making inconsistent findings on a simultaneously tried Title VII claim. The court also reversed the setting aside of punitive damages.
• Cross v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  721 F.2d 1152· 8th Cir.· 1983-11-18 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action for willful failure to comply with discovery orders, revoking in forma pauperis status due to financial misrepresentations, or assessing costs against the plaintiff.
• Doherty v. Am. Motors Corp.
  728 F.2d 334· 6th Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 21×
  The court held that a corporation cannot conspire with its own employees and that the plaintiff's claims were barred by collateral estoppel due to a prior nolo contendere plea and subsequent proceedings.
• Travis v. Gary Cmty. Mental Health Ctr., Inc.
  921 F.2d 108· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-27 ·cited 19×
  The court held that intra-corporate discussions among managers do not constitute a conspiracy under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2), but the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) authorizes compensatory and punitive damages for retaliatory discharge.
• Taubenfeld v. Lasko
  324 So. 3d 529· Fla. 4th DCA· 2021-08-11 ·cited 18×
  The Fourth Amended Complaint stated causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty against Jonathan Lasko as an operating officer of Passover FB, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty against Sam, Arlene, and Avi Lasko, and conversion of certain tangible and intangible asse
• Nationwide Mut. Co. v. Ft. Myers Total Rehab Ctr., Inc.
  657 F. Supp. 2d 1279· M.D. Fla.· 2009-08-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction was met by aggregating claims, and that most of the plaintiff's claims were sufficiently pleaded to survive a motion to dismiss, except for civil conspiracy.
• State v. Tenet Healthcare
  420 F. Supp. 2d 1288· S.D. Fla.· 2005-08-29 ·cited 17×
  The court held that Medicare does not preempt the plaintiffs' state law claims or supersede their federal RICO claims, and that the plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged standing for their RICO claims.
• After v. United States
  766 F.2d 347· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-27 ·cited 15×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review tribal resolutions interpreting tribal law and that appellants failed to exhaust administrative remedies regarding BIA actions. Claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 failed due to the inability of a tribal council to conspire
• Palmer v. Gotta Have It Golf Collectibles, Inc.
  106 F. Supp. 2d 1289· S.D. Fla.· 2000-06-22 ·cited 14×
  The court granted summary judgment for the third-party defendant on antitrust, tortious interference, civil theft, and negligence claims, but denied it on defamation claims.
• Stacie Weisman & Mktg. & Mgmt. v. S. Wine & Spirits of Am., Inc.
  297 So. 3d 646· Fla. 4th DCA· 2020-05-13 ·cited 13×
  Weisman and her employer MMS appealed summary judgments in favor of her former employer on tortious interference and conspiracy claims arising from the former employer's memorandum to retailers refusing to do business with Weisman or MMS. The court affirmed the summary judgment,
• Logan v. Morgan
  350 So. 3d 404· Fla. 2d DCA· 2022-10-21 ·cited 9×
  The appellate court reversed the trial court's dismissal of claims against a law firm, finding that the plaintiff adequately alleged causes of action for aiding and abetting fraud and breach of fiduciary duty, as well as civil conspiracy. The court held that attorneys can be liab
• Edwards v. Dothan City Schs.
  82 F.4th 1306· 11th Cir.· 2023-10-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a public employee with a for-cause termination contract has a property interest in employment, and the district court erred by dismissing the due process claim based on an interpretation of ambiguous documents against the plaintiff. The court affirmed dismissa
• Irizarry v. Hon. Carlos Quiros
  722 F.2d 869· 1st Cir.· 1983-11-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendants' denial of reemployment to plaintiffs due to their prior legal actions constituted a conspiracy actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2), and that punitive damages and attorneys' fees were properly awarded.
• Microsoft Corp. v. Big Boy Distrib. LLC
  589 F. Supp. 2d 1308· S.D. Fla.· 2008-12-03 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the first sale doctrine does not apply to copyrighted works manufactured abroad, and therefore, the importation and distribution of such works without authorization constitutes copyright infringement.
• Cowart v. Duro
  2023 WL 5069482· M.D. Fla.· 2024-10-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint contained numerous deficiencies, including failure to state a claim, improper citation of statutes, and claims barred by immunity doctrines, requiring a second amended complaint.
• Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Boeing Co.
  357 F. Supp. 2d 1350· M.D. Fla.· 2005-02-16 ·cited 6×
  Lockheed Martin sued Boeing, McDonnell Douglas, and Boeing Launch Services, alleging violations of RICO and Florida RICO based on Boeing's alleged theft and misuse of Lockheed Martin's confidential satellite launch proposal information to win government contracts. The court grant
• Mancinelli v. Davis
  217 So. 3d 1034· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-04-05 ·cited 5×
  This case addresses the intra-corporate conspiracy doctrine and its application to civil conspiracy claims. The court held that a corporate CEO cannot conspire with the corporation itself unless the CEO has a personal stake separate from the corporation's interests, but reversed
• Lapar v. Potter
  395 F. Supp. 2d 1152· M.D. Fla.· 2005-10-19 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 due to the intracorporate conspiracy doctrine and the exclusivity of the Rehabilitation Act. Rehabilitation Act claims were dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and Florida Civil
• Portman v. Cnty. OF Santa Clara
  995 F.2d 898· 9th Cir.· 1993-06-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the public defender lacked standing to assert his clients' Sixth Amendment rights because those claims were not ripe, and he had no constitutionally protected property interest in his job as an at-will employee.
• Nola P. Richmond v. Bd. OF Regents OF the Univ. OF Minn.
  957 F.2d 595· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-25 ·cited 4×
  Summary judgment for the University was proper because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and did not present evidence of pretext for her termination.
• Nurse Midwifery Assocs. v. B.K. Hibbett, M.D.
  918 F.2d 605· 6th Cir.· 1990-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the intracorporate conspiracy doctrine prevents finding a conspiracy between a hospital and its medical staff, but not among competing members of the medical staff. The court also declined to adopt the independent personal stake exception.
• United States Ex Rel. Vargas v. Lackmann Food Serv., Inc.
  510 F. Supp. 2d 957· M.D. Fla.· 2007-06-01 ·cited 3×
  The court denied summary judgment on claims of presenting false claims, obtaining payment for false claims, false claims holdbacks, and wrongful termination, but granted summary judgment on the false claims conspiracy count.
• LMP v. Sch. Bd. of Broward Cnty.
  516 F. Supp. 2d 1305· S.D. Fla.· 2007-09-27 ·cited 2×
  Individual school board employees cannot be held liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as the IDEA limits liability to funding recipients and does not provide for individual liability.
• Gilbuilt Homes, Inc. v. Continental Homes OF NEW England
  667 F.2d 209· 1st Cir.· 1981-12-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's antitrust claims under the Sherman Act, Clayton Act, and Robinson-Patman Act were properly dismissed for failure to state a claim, as the pleadings lacked sufficient factual allegations regarding conspiracy, market definition, and anti-competit
• Alexander v. President Donald J. Trump
  404 So. 3d 425· Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-02-12 ·cited 1×
  Personal jurisdiction over the eighteen nonresident defendants is proper under Florida's long-arm statute and the Due Process Clause because Trump adequately pleaded that the defendants conspired with a Florida resident to commit the tortious act of defamation by issuing a websit
• Baker v. Chandler
  161 F. Supp. 2d 1372· S.D. Fla.· 2001-09-19 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff's speech was not protected under the First Amendment as it did not concern a matter of public concern, and that he received adequate procedural due process. State law claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
• Valley Nat'l Bank v. Jenkins
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-11
  The court recommended granting default judgment on breach of contract claims against the LLCs and the guarantor, but denied default judgment on fraud, conspiracy, aiding and abetting fraud, and declaratory judgment claims.
• Benessere Inv. Grp., LLC v. Swider
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-04
  Benessere Investment Group and ARC Global Investments II sued Eric Swider, Alexander Cano, and Renatus Advisors for hacking into their computer systems and misappropriating confidential information about DWAC (a SPAC merging with Trump Media), which Swider allegedly used to orche
• Driven Intermediate Holdings, Inc. v. [Unknown]
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2025-08-28
  The Delaware Superior Court denied the motion to dismiss claims for fraud in the inducement, indemnity, and declaratory judgment, finding them sufficiently pleaded. However, the court granted the motion to dismiss claims for aiding and abetting fraud and civil conspiracy, applyin
• Hopps v. City of Tampa
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-24
  The court held that Detective Strickland is not entitled to qualified immunity on claims of illegal detention and prosecution under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, but is entitled to qualified immunity on the failure to intervene claim. The conspiracy claim is dismissed wit
• Johnson v. Snyder
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-04-24
  The court held that claims against certain defendants were unexhausted or failed to state a claim, but allowed retaliation and excessive force claims against others to proceed.
• Paulcin v. Chunn
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-01-24
  Claims arising after the case initiation date are dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, Fourteenth Amendment claims are dismissed for failure to state a claim, and official capacity claims are dismissed due to Eleventh Amendment immunity.
• Reddick v. Osborn
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-01-23
  The court held that some claims are dismissed for failure to state a claim, while others may proceed but are stayed pending resolution of related state criminal proceedings.
• Doss v. Holder
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-24
  Surgret Doss, representing himself, sued law enforcement officers and the City of Tampa after being charged with perjury based on an indigency application he filed, which charged he did not own property despite owning four properties; he claimed the prosecution lacked probable ca
• Safety Harbor Powersports, LLC v. City of Safety Harbor
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-12
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently plead a 'class of one' equal protection claim because it did not identify a similarly situated comparator with adequate specificity, and dismissed the procedural due process claim for failure to plead the unavailability of
• Moore v. Adventist Health Sys. Sunbelt Healthcare Corp.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-23
  The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting in part the defendants' motion to dismiss.
• Doss v. Holder
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-09-28
  Surgret Doss sued several law enforcement officials and the City of Tampa, alleging conspiracy and malicious prosecution after a judge referred him to police for potential perjury during a foreclosure dispute, leading to his arrest and prosecution. The district court dismissed mo
• Chingarev v. Rambosk
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-09-20
  The court granted in part and denied in part the motions to dismiss, finding some claims sufficiently pleaded while others were barred by statute or doctrine.