Joint And Several Liability

986 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 19 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Immordino
  534 F.2d 1378· 10th Cir.· 1976-03-12 ·cited 26×
  The release of co-guarantors did not affect the appellants' liability because their guaranty agreement expressly permitted such releases and impliedly waived their right to contribution.
• Standard Indus., Inc. v. Mobil OIL Corp.
  475 F.2d 220· 10th Cir.· 1973-03-14 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its rulings on jury instructions, evidence admission, witness misconduct, or sufficiency of evidence, affirming the jury's verdict and judgments.
• Davidow v. Seyfarth
  58 So. 2d 865· Fla.· 1952-05-09 ·cited 26×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for the plaintiff, finding that the plaintiff's claim against the defendant was barred by a covenant not to sue executed with a co-tortfeasor. The court also noted issues with the plaintiff's proof of employment and potential procedur
• Barnes v. THE Kellogg Co.
  846 So. 2d 568· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-04-25 ·cited 25×
  Maria Barnes appeals a judgment awarding attorneys' fees to defendants Kellogg Company and Albertson's, Inc., based on a joint settlement proposal filed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442. The court upholds the award, holding that a unified settlement proposal by two def
• Strahan v. Gauldin
  756 So. 2d 158· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-03-17 ·cited 25×
  The Strahans appealed a judgment for damages awarded to Gauldin after a juke box fell from a pickup truck during loading and injured him. The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the damages judgment but reversed and remanded the attorney's fees award, finding the res ipsa loq
• George Haas, M.D. v. Zaccaria
  659 So. 2d 1130· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-08-02 ·cited 25×
  In a medical malpractice case arising from a child's leg amputation following a distal femoral osteotomy, the trial court improperly restricted the defendants' ability to present alternative defenses and excluded relevant evidence regarding the foreseeability of the injury and th
• Lockard v. Mo. Pac. R.R. Co.
  894 F.2d 299· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-19 ·cited 25×
  The court held that pendent party jurisdiction was proper under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) because the statute does not expressly or implicitly prohibit it, unlike the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).
• O'Neil v. Picillo
  883 F.2d 176· 1st Cir.· 1989-08-21 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the appellants failed to meet their burden of proving the divisibility of harm, thus upholding their joint and several liability for past and future cleanup costs under CERCLA.
• Walt Disney World Co. v. Aloysia Wood
  515 So. 2d 198· Fla.· 1987-11-05 ·cited 25×
  Walt Disney World challenged a judgment holding it jointly and severally liable for 86% of a plaintiff's damages despite the jury finding it only 1% at fault. The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question affirming that joint and several liability remains viable under F
• Roberts v. Seaboard Sur. Co.
  158 Fla. 686· Fla.· 1947-04-01 ·cited 25×
  This case concerns whether a default judgment against Seaboard Surety Company was properly entered when the underlying declaration named it as a joint defendant alongside Southeastern Construction Company, but the bill of particulars (made part of the declaration) showed an accou
• Somers v. The Fla. Pebble Phosphate Co.
  50 Fla. 275· Fla.· 1905-06-01 ·cited 25×
  Somers sued the Florida Pebble Phosphate Company and its individual stockholders/officers on a promissory note originally issued in 1891 and endorsed by the defendants. The court affirmed judgment for the defendants, holding that whether the instrument is treated as a promissory
• Franks v. Gary John Bowers, M.D.
  116 So. 3d 1240· Fla.· 2013-06-20 ·cited 24×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a pre-surgery arbitration agreement with a $250,000 cap on non-economic damages violates public policy established by Florida's Medical Malpractice Act because it removes incentives for patients to arbitrate and provides fewer remedies than the
• United States v. Chaney
  964 F.2d 437· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-19 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction and restitution order, finding no reversible error in the jury instructions, indictment sufficiency, evidence sufficiency, or restitution calculation.
• Wilford Leroy Thompson, Jr. v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp.
  714 F.2d 581· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that Louisiana law would not dispense with proof of causation against defendants for whom no factual connection to the plaintiff's injury was shown, and affirmed summary judgment.
• United States v. R & D ONE Stop Records, Inc.
  661 F.2d 433· 5th Cir.· 1981-11-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the government is not bound by misrepresentations of its agents acting outside the scope of their authority, and therefore summary judgment for the government was proper.
• Oilfield Safety & Mach. Specialties, Inc. v. Harman Unlimited, Inc.
  625 F.2d 1248· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the 'relative nature of the work' test is appropriate for determining employment under the LHWCA, and that dual employers are jointly and severally liable for benefits. Attorney's fees can be awarded when disputes involve medical benefits.
• Bellingham Frozen Foods, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  626 F.2d 674· 9th Cir.· 1980-08-07 ·cited 24×
  A successor employer must bargain with the incumbent union if it's perfectly clear they intend to hire a majority of the predecessor's employees, but this successor status does not automatically extend to remedying the predecessor's unfair labor practices concerning a different e
• In re Sugar Indus. Antitrust Litig. Stotter & Co., Inc. v. Amstar Corp.
  579 F.2d 13· 3d Cir.· 1978-03-06 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a factual assertion made in a post-opinion affidavit, not presented to the district court, would not be considered on rehearing. The court also declined to address new legal issues not raised below or on appeal.
• Bullard v. Cent. Vt. Ry., Inc.
  565 F.2d 193· 1st Cir.· 1977-11-15 ·cited 24×
  The jury's award of $35,000 to Gonyer was grossly excessive and cannot stand without further evidence of enduring psychological harm; the contract between the railroads requires Central Vermont to indemnify B&M for damages awarded against B&M in wrongful death actions.
• Hoffman-La Roche, Inc. v. Greenberg
  447 F.2d 872· 7th Cir.· 1971-08-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the conspiracy verdicts against the appellants, but sufficient to support the conversion verdicts.
• Weaver v. Marcus
  165 F.2d 862· 4th Cir.· 1948-01-31 ·cited 24×
  A district court's denial of a motion to dismiss a party to preserve diversity jurisdiction is reversible error if based on a misconception of law regarding partnership liability.
• Hale v. Administratrix
  2 Fla. 534· Fla.· 1849-01-01 ·cited 24×
  Lewis Hale, Michael Ferrall, and Thomas M. Crowell obtained a judgment by default against one of three joint obligors on a bond, then dismissed the suit against the other two obligors. The plaintiffs seek reversal of their own judgment, arguing it was improvidently taken and inju
• Anderson Trucking Serv., Inc. v. Gibson
  884 So. 2d 1046· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-10-15 ·cited 23×
  The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's order disqualifying counsel for defendants ICE and Anderson in a wrongful death action. The court held that the plaintiff Gibson lacked standing to seek disqualification of opposing counsel and that even if she h
• Samuel L. Heller, P.A. v. Held
  817 So. 2d 1023· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-06-05 ·cited 23×
  Attorney Samuel Heller sought to recover attorney's fees from defendants who settled a lawsuit with Heller's client without providing Heller notice or payment, despite his valid charging lien. The court reversed summary judgment in the defendants' favor, holding that Heller had p
• Mark J. Letzter, M.D. v. Cephas
  792 So. 2d 481· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-01-24 ·cited 23×
  In this medical malpractice appeal, the court addressed whether an initial treating physician (Dr. Letzter) could be held liable for subsequent medical negligence by a second treating physician (Dr. Armand) under the Stuart v. Hertz doctrine, and whether non-economic damages must
• Rachelle M. Stellas v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc.
  673 So. 2d 940· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-05-22 ·cited 23×
  In a direct negligence action against a rental car company for failure to warn of dangers in a particular area, the Florida No-Fault Motor Vehicle statute does not apply, and plaintiffs need not prove permanent injury to recover noneconomic damages. A jury may apportion fault bet
• Uslife Title Ins. Co. OF Dallas v. Mathews
  784 F.2d 1238· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-14 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the government's continued collection efforts were substantially justified under the Equal Access to Justice Act, as its right to retain funds was not secure until the statute of limitations for refund claims expired.
• Swift Indus., Inc. v. Botany Indus., Inc.
  466 F.2d 1125· 3d Cir.· 1972-08-14 ·cited 23×
  The court held that an arbitrator's award of a $6 million bond was improper because it did not draw its essence from the agreement and was completely irrational, but the award of counsel fees for the arbitration proceedings was permissible.
• Aventura Mgmt., LLC v. Spiaggia Ocean Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  105 So. 3d 637· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-01-23 ·cited 22×
  Aventura Management appeals a summary judgment against it regarding liability for past due condominium assessments. The court reversed, holding that under Florida Statute § 718.116(1)(a), a condominium association that becomes an intervening owner through foreclosure remains join
• McLEMORE v. Landry
  898 F.2d 996· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-06 ·cited 22×·via Solidary Liability
  The court held that the notice of appeal only conferred jurisdiction over the partnership, not the individual partners, and affirmed the summary judgment for FSLIC based on the D'Oench doctrine, rejecting the partnership's defenses.
• Smith Int'l, Inc. v. Tex. Commerce Bank
  844 F.2d 1193· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by imposing sanctions under Rule 11, as the plaintiffs' argument that the promissory notes constituted securities, though ultimately incorrect, was based on a plausible, albeit flawed, interpretation of existing law and
• Marcus v. Jefferson Inv. Corp.
  797 F.2d 227· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that damages for tortious interference with contract in Texas are limited to the plaintiff's actual loss, not the defendant's profits, and that a settlement credit from a breaching party must be fully applied to reduce the recovery against an interfering party.
• Stephen Bodzo Realty, Inc. v. Willits Int'l Corp.
  428 So. 2d 225· Fla.· 1983-01-27 ·cited 22×
  The Florida Supreme Court overruled its prior precedent in Penza v. Neckles, holding that a release of one joint and several obligor executed before June 23, 1980, does not automatically release other joint and several obligors when the release expressly reserves the right to sue
• The Carolina Cas. Ins. Co. v. The Ins. Co. OF N. Am.
  595 F.2d 128· 3d Cir.· 1979-03-05 ·cited 22×
  Federal motor carrier regulations do not alter parties' rights to contribution or impose primary duty on a lessee to pay a lessor's judgment; insurance contract interpretation requires state law analysis.
• The United Transp. Union Local NO. 974, AFL-CIO v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.
  532 F.2d 336· 4th Cir.· 1975-09-22 ·cited 22×
  The majority opinion's findings and conclusions are contrary to the record and legal principles, particularly regarding the application of the 'clearly erroneous' standard and the justification for a back pay award.
• Schein v. Chasen
  478 F.2d 817· 2d Cir.· 1973-05-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that individuals trading on inside information without a fiduciary relationship to the corporation can be held liable in a shareholder derivative action for profits made, based on a 'joint enterprise' theory.
• Clark v. Berkeley L. Bunker
  453 F.2d 1006· 9th Cir.· 1972-01-14 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a detailed plan for prepaid funeral services, developed and used in a business, can constitute a trade secret protectable against misappropriation, and affirmed the award of compensatory and punitive damages.
• Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co. v. Minn. Transfer Ry. Co.
  371 F.2d 129· 8th Cir.· 1967-01-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the appellants were properly found jointly and severally liable for contribution under Minnesota law, as their negligence was a proximate cause of the decedent's death and there was common liability.
• Climax Chem. Co. v. C. F. Braun & Co.
  370 F.2d 616· 10th Cir.· 1966-12-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a case is not removable to federal court if it does not contain separate and independent claims for relief, and doubts should be resolved in favor of remand.
• Williams v. Keyes
  125 F.2d 208· 5th Cir.· 1942-01-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the removal of the case to federal court was proper, and the subsequent bringing in of third-party defendants did not divest the court of jurisdiction. The judgments entered were supported by the bond and indemnity agreements.
• Hall v. Lexington Ins. Co.
  895 So. 2d 1161· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-02-16 ·cited 21×
  The Halls appealed from a final judgment awarding attorney's fees to their homeowner's insurance company, Lexington, arguing that Lexington's settlement offer was invalid because it failed to specify punitive damages, failed to apportion amounts between the two plaintiffs, and wa
• United States v. Asmar
  827 F.2d 907· 3d Cir.· 1987-08-27 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the taxpayer did not suffer a legally cognizable detriment from the IRS agents' misrepresentations, and therefore, the government cannot be estopped from collecting the tax liability.
• Fitzgerald Publ'g Co., Inc. v. Baylor Publ'g Co., Inc.
  807 F.2d 1110· 2d Cir.· 1986-12-17 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the printer (World Color) was jointly and severally liable for statutory damages due to willful copyright infringement, and that actual damages must be calculated based on market value injury, not contract performance.
• In re N-500L Cases. Cornhill Ins. Co. Ltd.
  691 F.2d 15· 1st Cir.· 1982-09-28 ·cited 21×
  The court held that appellants had a right to a jury trial on the issue of their insured's negligence liability, but waived their right to a jury trial on the issue of proportionate fault among the tortfeasors.
• United States v. M/V BIG SAM
  681 F.2d 432· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-30 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the owner and bareboat charterer of a negligent, non-discharging vessel are jointly and severally liable under § 1321(g) for oil spill cleanup costs, and that an in rem remedy against the vessel and a maritime tort claim are not preempted by the Act.
• White v. World Fin. OF Meridian, Inc.
  653 F.2d 147· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-07 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the federal Truth-in-Lending Act claim and the state Small Loan Act claim were separate causes of action, thus res judicata did not apply. However, the court modified the damage award to grant each borrower the statutory penalty allowed under the TILA.
• Self v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  588 F.2d 655· 9th Cir.· 1978-03-30 ·cited 21×
  The dissent argues that the voluntary-involuntary rule should not preclude removal when the elimination of the resident defendant is final and no duplication of state proceedings would occur.
• Dement v. Olin-Mathieson Chem. Corp.
  282 F.2d 76· 5th Cir.· 1960-08-11 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed the judgment as to duPont but reversed and remanded for retrial against Atlas Powder Company and Olin-Mathieson Chemical Corporation.
• Hillsboro Plantation v. Plunkett
  55 So.2d 534· Fla.· 1951-12-14 ·cited 21×
  The Florida Supreme Court considered whether a judgment in favor of one defendant, when a codefendant's case was still pending after a new trial was granted, constituted a final, appealable judgment. The court held that it was final and appealable, denying a motion to dismiss the
• Coker v. Phillips
  89 Fla. 283· Fla.· 1925-03-23 ·cited 21×
  Coker v. Royal & Phillips addresses the proper pleading and proof requirements for reviving time-barred debt through partial payment and written acknowledgment. The Florida Supreme Court reverses the trial court's judgment against Coker, holding that the plaintiffs improperly shi