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

• Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Boatright
  217 So. 3d 166· Fla. 2d DCA· 2017-04-12 ·cited 20×
  In this tobacco liability case, the Second District Court of Appeal largely affirmed a $32.75 million judgment against Philip Morris and Liggett for a smoker's COPD and his wife's loss of consortium, but reversed and remanded on the issue of comparative fault reduction, holding t
• Thomas E. Hoar, Inc. v. Sara LEE Corp.
  900 F.2d 522· 2d Cir.· 1990-04-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the appellant law firm lacked standing to challenge the district court's review standard and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sanctions for discovery violations, finding due process was satisfied.
• Amoco OIL Co. v. Borden, Inc.
  889 F.2d 664· 5th Cir.· 1989-12-08 ·cited 20×
  The court denied Borden's petition for rehearing, clarifying that liability was established for the entire tract based on exceeding federal standards, and leaving specific cleanup and cost apportionment to the district court.
• Thomas v. Booker
  784 F.2d 299· 8th Cir.· 1986-02-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury improperly apportioned indivisible actual damages among defendants, requiring vacation of the award and remand for a new trial on actual damages.
• United States v. Glynn Batson
  706 F.2d 657· 5th Cir.· 1983-06-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the government's suits to recover alleged overpayments under the Upland Cotton Price Support Program were not barred by the statute of limitations and that the regulation under which recovery was sought was not unconstitutionally vague.
• Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. Ouimet Corp.
  630 F.2d 4· 1st Cir.· 1980-08-29 ·cited 20×
  Where a controlled group of corporations also meets the definition of businesses under common control, ERISA's common control definition makes the group a single employer for liability purposes.
• Mr. and Mrs. Archie Davis v. United Cos. Mortg. & Inv. OF Gretna, Inc.
  551 F.2d 971· 5th Cir.· 1977-05-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a creditor failing to disclose required information is subject to a penalty for each obligor when a loan is made to a family unit with joint and several liability.
• Erick S. Moore v. ST. Cloud Utils.
  337 So. 2d 982· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-07-30 ·cited 20×
  A 14-year-old boy was injured when he contacted a downed live electrical power line after a vehicle collision with a utility pole. The trial court apportioned liability among defendants based on their percentages of comparative fault, but the appellate court reversed, holding tha
• Leaseco, Inc. v. Bartlett
  257 So. 2d 629· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-12-16 ·cited 20×
  In a wrongful death action arising from a fatal automobile collision, the court upheld summary judgment determining that Leaseco, Inc. was the owner of the truck at the time of the accident based on an unambiguous lease agreement, rejected extrinsic evidence seeking to characteri
• Hartnett v. The Reiss S.S. Co.
  421 F.2d 1011· 2d Cir.· 1970-01-22 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that International and Grain Handling were equally liable for the plaintiff's injuries, and that the trial court correctly determined issues of negligence, warranty, and liability apportionment.
• NEW Homes OF Pensacola, Inc. v. Mayne
  169 So. 2d 345· Fla. 1st DCA· 1964-11-19 ·cited 20×
  Landowners sued to enjoin developers from negligently maintaining a drainage system that caused erosion of their property. The court affirmed a mandatory injunction requiring the developers to restore the damaged land and improve the drainage system, holding that developers canno
• Solomon v. United States
  276 F.2d 669· 6th Cir.· 1960-04-04 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts and that the trial court properly overruled motions for directed verdicts and a new trial. The court also affirmed the entry of joint and several judgments.
• S. Fla. Coastal Elec., Inc. v. Treasures ON the BAY II Condo Ass'n, Inc.
  89 So. 3d 264· Fla. 3d DCA· 2012-04-25 ·cited 19×
  South Florida Coastal Electric appeals a summary judgment in favor of Treasures on the Bay II Condo Association, arguing the trial court improperly granted summary judgment on an affirmative defense despite material disputes of fact. The court reverses, holding that unresolved fa
• Southland Constr., Inc. v. The Richeson Corp.
  642 So. 2d 5· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-07-22 ·cited 19×
  Southland Construction appeals a summary judgment dismissing its negligence claim against Thomas E. Richeson, an engineer, based on the economic loss rule. The Fifth District affirms the dismissal of the contract claim against Richeson individually but reverses the negligence dis
• Shea v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  780 F.2d 561· 6th Cir.· 1986-01-08 ·cited 19×
  The court held that Sally Shea did not qualify as an "innocent spouse" for 1976 because she had reason to know of the tax omissions. The court reversed the Tax Court's decision for 1977, finding the return invalid as to Sally Shea because it was not signed by her or her husband,
• Moore v. Mrs. Jimmie F. Lindsey
  662 F.2d 354· 5th Cir.· 1981-11-30 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the Georgia long arm statute confers personal jurisdiction over a devisee who owns property in Georgia, and that the Cook County property devised to the daughter must bear the PCA indebtedness. The court also held that federal courts lack subject matter jurisd
• Leesburg Hosp. Ass'n, Inc. v. Edward W. Carter, M.D.
  321 So. 2d 433· Fla. 2d DCA· 1975-11-12 ·cited 19×
  Leesburg Hospital Association appealed the dismissal of its third-party complaint against Dr. Carter, seeking indemnification and contribution for injuries to patient Mrs. Prevatt. The court reversed, holding that while indemnification was unavailable under active negligence prin
• Parton v. Palomino Lakes Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc.
  928 So. 2d 449· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-04-28 ·cited 18×
  The Partons appealed a trial court order awarding them attorneys' fees in a deed-restriction enforcement action against their neighbors. The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that the trial court erred in limiting fee awards to only those incurred before the temporar
• Graham v. The Peter K. Yeskel 1996 Irrevocable Tr.
  928 So. 2d 371· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-03-01 ·cited 18×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of attorney's fees to defendants Richard and Ann Graham because their joint settlement proposal failed to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442(c)(3), which requires that joint proposals apportion t
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Rush
  777 So. 2d 1027· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-12-27 ·cited 18×
  This case addresses how uninsured motorist (UM) carriers are entitled to credits against damages awards when an injured party settles with an underinsured tortfeasor before trial. The court held that a UM carrier's credit is limited to the damages that could have been recovered f
• Acadia P'rs, L.P. v. Tompkins
  759 So. 2d 732· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-05-26 ·cited 18×
  Acadia Partners sued the Tompkinses to pierce their corporation's veil and recover $30 million owed by their company TIGI. The trial court entered judgment for Acadia and applied setoffs for pretrial settlements, then calculated interest under the amended Florida judgment interes
• Transpower Constructors v. Grand River DAM Auth.
  905 F.2d 1413· 10th Cir.· 1990-06-15 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the trial court's rulings, holding that the jury's damage award was not speculative, the contract did not bar Transpower's claims, and the indemnity clause did not shield Benham from liability for its own negligence absent a clear showing of intent.
• Erwin v. Cnty. OF Manitowoc
  872 F.2d 1292· 7th Cir.· 1989-04-19 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the confusing jury verdict and inconsistent findings necessitated a new trial for all parties.
• Progressive Am. Ins. Co. v. McKINNIE
  513 So. 2d 748· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-10-07 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the insurer was not bound by a prior judgment determining the negligence of another driver because it was not a party and not in privity with the parties, and thus the issue of the other driver's negligence remains a material fact.
• Bayles v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  483 So. 2d 402· Fla.· 1985-11-25 ·cited 18×
  An injured third person cannot recover under their own uninsured motorist (UM) policy if another jointly liable tortfeasor has liability insurance with policy limits equal to or greater than the injured person's UM coverage.
• Scno Barge Lines, Inc. v. SUN Transp. Co., Inc.
  775 F.2d 221· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-09 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed liability for the grounding but remanded for recalculation of prejudgment interest rates and reconsideration of interest awarded against the Government, holding that SCNO is entitled to joint and several recovery.
• Ferd Schneider v. Dumbarton Developers, Inc.
  767 F.2d 1007· D.C. Cir.· 1985-07-23 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the appellants did not substantially perform their obligations under the contract by the deadline and that the August 4 Settlement Agreement eliminated any notice and cure period. The court also found that 2106 F Street Associates, as an intervenor, was subjec
• Smith v. Updegraff
  744 F.2d 1354· 8th Cir.· 1984-10-01 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the defendants' actions were not barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel, that the statute of limitations was correctly applied, and that the prosecutor was not immune from suit for actions outside his official duties.
• Milwaukee Cnty. v. Roswitha Peters & U. S. Dep't of Labor
  682 F.2d 609· 7th Cir.· 1982-06-01 ·cited 18×
  Milwaukee County, as a CETA prime sponsor, is jointly and severally liable with a sub-grantee for back pay awarded to an improperly discharged CETA employee, and the award of six months' back pay was justified.
• Mitchell v. Volkswagenwerk, AG
  669 F.2d 1199· 8th Cir.· 1982-02-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court erred in failing to rule the paraplegic injury indivisible as a matter of law, and that the jury should have been instructed on joint and several liability if the defect was a substantial factor. The apportioned verdict was inconsistent with th
• Slotkin v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York
  614 F.2d 301· 2d Cir.· 1979-08-29 ·cited 18×
  The court denied most petitions for rehearing, clarifying that its prior decision did not impinge on reinsurance privity and that a retrial could address agency and misrepresentation. It also struck an alternative holding against John McGrath based on a theory not previously adva
• Mattschei v. United States
  600 F.2d 205· 9th Cir.· 1979-06-21 ·cited 18×
  The United States, as a tortfeasor under the FTCA, is subject to California's rule of joint and several liability for indivisible injuries, even under comparative negligence, and should have been permitted to implead other tortfeasors for contribution or indemnity.
• Leonard L. Farber Co., Inc. v. Jaksch
  335 So. 2d 847· Fla. 4th DCA· 1976-07-09 ·cited 18×
  This case involves a dispute over contractual indemnity between a shopping mall owner (Farber) and a tenant (Vandermark) after they jointly settled a personal injury lawsuit. The court determined that the lease agreement's indemnity clause, despite an addendum, clearly intended f
• Screen Gems-Columbia Music, Inc. v. Metlis & Lebow Corp.
  453 F.2d 552· 2d Cir.· 1972-01-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that payments made by settling co-defendants in a copyright infringement suit must be credited against the judgment awarded to the plaintiff, even if liability was not admitted by the settling defendants.
• Peter M. Elliott in Bankruptcy for the Estate of Henry H. Herrera v. Glushon
  390 F.2d 514· 9th Cir.· 1967-12-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Bankruptcy Act limits a trustee's recovery for fraudulent transfers and voidable preferences to persons who have actually received the property in question, not merely those who conspired to effect the transfer.
• Collins v. Gov't OF the Virgin Islands of the United States
  366 F.2d 279· 3d Cir.· 1966-09-14 ·cited 18×
  A defendant can rely on a co-defendant's timely jury demand when sued jointly and severally for the same injury, and the trial court erred in denying the Government a jury trial under these circumstances.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Newspaper & Mail Deliverers' Union of N.Y. & Vicinity
  192 F.2d 654· 2d Cir.· 1951-11-30 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board can order joint and several liability for back pay against a union and employer for discriminatory hiring practices, even if the employer acted under union coercion.
• Nichols v. Rothkopf
  135 Fla. 749· Fla.· 1939-01-03 ·cited 18×
  In this automobile collision case, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed a trial judge's grant of a new trial after a jury verdict for the defendant truck owner. The court found the evidence clearly showed the truck driver's negligence in making a left-hand turn without adequate war
• Wilson v. Phœbe Fridenberg
  22 Fla. 114· Fla.· 1886-01-01 ·cited 18×
  In this appeal, the Florida Supreme Court held that an executor's husband who executes a bond and mortgage as a representative of an estate is personally liable on those instruments when they contain unambiguous personal covenants, despite his fiduciary capacity. The court also r
• In re Brooklyn Navy Yard Asbestos Litig. (Joint E. & S. Dist. Asbestos Litigation)
  971 F.2d 831· 2d Cir.· 1992-06-30 ·cited 17×
  The court held that plaintiffs' proof of causation was sufficient, the jury instructions on superseding cause were adequate, and the district court properly applied the government contractor defense to bar design defect claims. The court also affirmed the exclusion of certain evi
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Wayne Cnty.
  760 F.2d 689· 6th Cir.· 1985-04-25 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the appellants lacked standing and the issues were not ripe for adjudication, thus the district court lacked jurisdiction.
• Hefley v. Textron, Inc.
  713 F.2d 1487· 10th Cir.· 1983-08-10 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the Feres doctrine bars indemnity and contribution claims against federal military personnel and the United States when injuries arise from activity incident to service, and that the Eleventh Amendment bars claims against state entities. Furthermore, federal c
• Marcus v. Otis
  168 F.2d 649· 2d Cir.· 1948-05-20 ·cited 17×
  Directors who misappropriated corporate funds to purchase stock for themselves are liable for the profits made, but not for conversion of the shares themselves, as the corporation did not acquire ownership of more than a portion of the shares.
• North v. Albee
  155 Fla. 515· Fla.· 1945-01-30 ·cited 17×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that executors of John Ringling's estate could pursue subrogation against F. H. Albee for funds the liquidator of Bank of Sarasota had arbitrarily taken from Ringling's deposits to pay Albee's share of a joint judgment, despite the action being file
• Tate v. Clements
  16 Fla. 339· Fla.· 1878-01-01 ·cited 17×
  In this contract case involving a partnership debt, the Florida Supreme Court reversed a jury verdict against Walter Tate, holding that a post-dissolution promise by his former partner Evans to pay a partnership debt does not bind Tate without his consent, particularly where the
• Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Laesser
  718 So. 2d 276· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-09-09 ·cited 16×
  GMAC appeals a jury verdict finding it liable under Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act for allegedly conspiring with a car dealership to deceive a consumer into leasing rather than purchasing a vehicle. The court reverses the judgment against GMAC, holding that th
• Fletcher v. Anderson
  616 So. 2d 1201· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-04-23 ·cited 16×
  Fletcher seeks certiorari review of an order striking his demand for jury trial in a contribution action against co-guarantors on a defaulted promissory note. The court grants the petition and remands, holding that whether jury trial is available depends on whether Fletcher seeks
• United States v. Scop
  940 F.2d 1004· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-13 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the convictions of Alan Scop and Raphael Bloom, finding no reversible error in the admission of evidence, jury instructions, or sentencing, and rejecting claims of inconsistent verdicts and double jeopardy.
• Phibro Res. Corp. & Salomon, Inc. v. State
  579 So. 2d 118· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-01-23 ·cited 16×
  Phibro Resources Corp. and Salomon, Inc., former owners of a phosphate fertilizer facility, challenged their exclusion from administrative proceedings where the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation entered consent orders with current and another former owner regarding g
• State OF Colo. v. Idarado Mining Co.
  916 F.2d 1486· 10th Cir.· 1990-10-11 ·cited 16×
  The court held that CERCLA § 121(e)(2) does not authorize a state to seek injunctive relief to enforce its independently selected cleanup plan when the federal government is not involved.