Justiciable Controversy

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

• 118 E. 60TH Owners, Inc. v. Bonner Props., Inc.
  677 F.2d 200· 2d Cir.· 1982-04-13 ·cited 6×
  A federal court in a diversity action cannot grant a declaratory judgment to establish the validity of a time-barred defense if state law would not permit such a use to initiate litigation, as doing so would undermine state substantive policy regarding statutes of limitations.
• S. Pac. Transp. Co. v. Brown
  651 F.2d 613· 9th Cir.· 1980-10-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the railroads' suit against the attorney general lacked a justiciable controversy because the attorney general's connection to the enforcement of the challenged statute was insufficient.
• Pattillo v. Schlesinger
  625 F.2d 262· 9th Cir.· 1980-08-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying class certification and correctly dismissed the action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and because mandamus was inappropriate.
• ST. Martin's Press v. Carey
  605 F.2d 41· 2d Cir.· 1979-01-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a genuine threat of prosecution, thus lacking a justiciable controversy required for federal court intervention.
• Council FOR Emp. & Econ. Energy USE v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States
  575 F.2d 311· 1st Cir.· 1978-05-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the FCC's ruling allowing broadcasters discretion in providing free reply time under the fairness doctrine, even when the recipient might be able to pay, was not unreasonable, unconstitutional, or illegal.
• Smith v. City OF Pinellas Park
  336 So. 2d 1255· Fla. 2d DCA· 1976-09-17 ·cited 6×
  Residents and taxpayers of Pinellas Park challenged a city council ordinance that shifted the appointment of police and fire chiefs from the city manager to the city council, arguing it altered the city's form of government without a required referendum. The court affirmed the di
• Int'l Video Corp. v. Ampex Corp.
  484 F.2d 634· 9th Cir.· 1973-09-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that dismissals for lack of jurisdiction are not governed by Rule 41 and that a counterclaim must also be dismissed if the main claim lacks a justiciable controversy.
• Rothblum v. Bd. OF Trs. OF the Coll. OF Med. & Dentistry OF NEW Jersey
  474 F.2d 891· 3d Cir.· 1973-02-22 ·cited 6×
  A single judge can dismiss for lack of standing, and the plaintiffs lacked standing because their low academic qualifications, not the college's preferential admissions policy, caused their rejection.
• Seymour N. Blackman v. Hadron, Inc.
  450 F.2d 781· 2d Cir.· 1971-10-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a justiciable controversy exists even without direct infringement charges, due to threats of infringement suits and their impact on the defendant's market.
• Richardson v. Sokol
  409 F.2d 3· 3d Cir.· 1969-04-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction because the complaint failed to affirmatively allege the requisite $10,000 amount in controversy for federal question jurisdiction.
• Krebs v. Ashbrook
  407 F.2d 306· D.C. Cir.· 1968-05-14 ·cited 6×
• Heath v. Cent. Truck Lines, Inc.
  195 So. 2d 588· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-03-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the complaint stated a cause of action for declaratory relief regarding contract interpretation, the contract's final and binding grievance procedure precluded judicial review of the seniority dispute.
• Nat'l Coupling Co., Inc. v. Press-Seal Gasket Corp.
  323 F.2d 629· 7th Cir.· 1963-10-10 ·cited 6×
  A patent owner cannot use the statutory defense for suppliers of staple articles (35 U.S.C. § 271(c)) as a basis to defeat jurisdiction in a declaratory judgment action challenging infringement and patent validity.
• Muskegon Piston Ring Co. v. Olsen
  307 F.2d 85· 6th Cir.· 1962-08-17 ·cited 6×
  A patent owner threatened with claims of invalidity, including assertions that the defendant is the true inventor, can seek a declaratory judgment under the Patent Laws and the Declaratory Judgment Act.
• Reynolds v. Wade
  249 F.2d 73· 9th Cir.· 1957-10-21 ·cited 6×
  An Alaskan taxpayer has standing to sue to enjoin unlawful expenditures of territorial funds, distinguishing prior precedent based on the direct financial burden imposed by the challenged statute.
• State v. Lewis
  72 So. 2d 823· Fla.· 1954-07-02 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court dismissed an appeal from a declaratory decree action where the Circuit Court clerk sought judicial clarification on proper mileage allowances for jurors. The Court held that without proper parties defendant and an actual controversy, the lower court lack
• Winsor v. Daumit
  185 F.2d 41· 7th Cir.· 1950-11-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the counterclaim seeking a declaratory judgment of copyright invalidity did not present an actual controversy, as the plaintiff's suit was solely for breach of contract.
• Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v. Farmers Bank of Clay
  178 F.2d 570· 6th Cir.· 1949-12-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the amended complaint sufficiently alleged an actual controversy, and the district court erred in dismissing the declaratory judgment action based on untimeliness of amendments and lack of controversy.
• Fed. Tel. & Radio Corp. v. Associated Tel. & Tel. Co.
  169 F.2d 1012· 3d Cir.· 1948-06-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a justiciable controversy exists for the 7 specific patents alleged to be infringed, but not for the broader group of patents mentioned in the advertisement.
• Elliott v. Am. MFG. Co. of Tex.
  138 F.2d 678· 5th Cir.· 1943-11-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a declaratory judgment was not appropriate because no actual controversy was disclosed and existing statutory remedies were available.
• Labriola v. Vlaunir Jimenez Da Silva
  359 So. 3d 1209· Fla. 3d DCA· 2024-11-20 ·cited 5×
  Christine Marie Labriola petitioned for a writ of mandamus against Vlaunir Jimenez Da Silva, but the Florida Third District Court of Appeal dismissed the petition as moot because the trial court ruled on the underlying motion during the pendency of the proceedings.
• Shell OIL Co. v. Amoco Corp.
  970 F.2d 885· Fed. Cir.· 1992-07-28 ·cited 5×
  The court held that Shell failed to establish a reasonable apprehension of being sued for patent infringement, thus no actual controversy existed for a declaratory judgment action.
• Capeletti Bros., Inc. v. Broward Cnty.
  738 F. Supp. 1415· S.D. Fla.· 1990-06-28 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing, ripeness, and a case or controversy to challenge the county's set-aside program, thus dismissing the complaint.
• EL Faison Dorado, Inc. v. Hillsborough Cnty.
  483 So. 2d 518· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-02-19 ·cited 5×
  A corporation sought a declaratory judgment challenging the constitutionality of a Hillsborough County ordinance prohibiting animal fighting. The trial court dismissed the action, and the appellate court affirmed the dismissal on the grounds that no justiciable controversy existe
• Bohannon v. McGOWAN
  222 So. 2d 60· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-04-16 ·cited 5×
  In this wrongful death action under Florida law, the administrator of a deceased plaintiff's estate appealed the trial court's dismissal based on abatement. The court held that wrongful death actions survive the death of the original plaintiff and may be prosecuted by the adminis
• Riverside Ave. Prop., LLC v. 1661 Riverside Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  325 So. 3d 997· Fla. 1st DCA· 2021-08-02 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's decision that a claim for declaratory relief was time-barred. The court held that the statute of limitations for declaratory relief in this context does not begin to run until a dispute arises between the parties, not when the property
• Dasma Invs., LLC v. Realty Assocs. Fund III, L.P.
  459 F. Supp. 2d 1294· S.D. Fla.· 2006-10-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Dasma's motion to remand is denied, Realty's motion for summary judgment is granted, and Dasma's claims against PWC are dismissed for lack of a justiciable case or controversy.
• Olive v. Maas
  911 So. 2d 837· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-09-02 ·cited 4×
  Attorney Mark Olive challenged the constitutionality of Florida's Registry Act governing compensation for court-appointed counsel in capital postconviction proceedings, specifically challenging sanctions enacted in 2002 that penalize attorneys seeking fees above statutory caps. T
• Am. Policyholders Ins. Co. v. Nyacol Prods., Inc.
  989 F.2d 1256· 1st Cir.· 1993-02-24 ·cited 4×
  A suit against a federal officer solely in their official capacity is not removable to federal court under the officer removal statute (28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1)) because it is considered a suit against the agency, which cannot remove under that statute.
• Gluth v. Kangas
  951 F.2d 1504· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Department of Corrections policies denied inmates meaningful access to the courts, and the district court's grant of summary judgment and injunctions were proper.
• Mobil OIL Corp. v. Attorney Gen. OF the Commonwealth OF Va.
  940 F.2d 73· 4th Cir.· 1991-07-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Mobil's suit presented a justiciable case or controversy, as the threat of enforcement of newly enacted VPPFA amendments created a substantial controversy warranting declaratory judgment.
• Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Norton Co.
  929 F.2d 670· Fed. Cir.· 1991-03-27 ·cited 4×
  It was an abuse of discretion to dismiss a declaratory judgment action for non-infringement based on a pending interference proceeding when the interference cannot decide or moot the infringement issues and the plaintiff will suffer significant harm from delay.
• Fleet Aerospace Corp. v. Holderman
  848 F.2d 720· 6th Cir.· 1988-06-06 ·cited 4×
  The court should find the Ohio Act preempted by the Williams Act and in violation of the Commerce Clause.
• Int'l Primate Prot. League v. Inst. FOR Behavioral Research, Inc.
  799 F.2d 934· 4th Cir.· 1986-09-04 ·cited 4×
  Private individuals lack standing to challenge a medical researcher's compliance with federal animal care standards under the Animal Welfare Act, as the Act provides for administrative enforcement only.
• Fleet Aerospace Corp. v. Holderman
  796 F.2d 135· 6th Cir.· 1986-06-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Ohio Control Share Acquisition Act is unconstitutional under both the Supremacy Clause and the Commerce Clause, affirming the district court's injunction against its enforcement.
• SAN Francisco Cnty. Democratic Cent. Comm. v. March Fong EU
  792 F.2d 802· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-18 ·cited 4×
  California's Elections Code provisions that dictate the membership of state central committees, the term of office for committee chairs, and prohibit preprimary endorsements by central committees violate the First Amendment rights of political parties to freedom of association an
• T.L.J. v. Webster
  792 F.2d 734· 8th Cir.· 1986-06-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Missouri Rev.Stat. § 188.028 is facially constitutional, and that the claims of T.L.J. and C.L.G. were properly dismissed due to mootness and lack of standing, respectively.
• Sepner v. Vill. OF Royal Palm Beach
  444 So. 2d 68· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-01-25 ·cited 4×
• People OF the State OF Ill. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  713 F.2d 305· 7th Cir.· 1983-07-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the ICC's denial of the petition to reopen the merger proceeding was not arbitrary or capricious, and therefore the petition for review is denied.
• Allain-Lebreton Co. v. Dep't OF the Army
  670 F.2d 43· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the company's allegations did not constitute a taking of property without just compensation, as no taking had yet occurred and the Corps' decision was not subject to judicial review.
• Faustin and Georgia Montoya v. Postal Credit Union
  630 F.2d 745· 10th Cir.· 1980-08-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Consumer Credit Protection Act and Regulation Z do not require disclosure of state law limitations on after-acquired property clauses, only the fact that such a clause exists.
• Germann v. Kipp
  572 F.2d 1258· 8th Cir.· 1978-03-15 ·cited 4×
  The case is moot because the plaintiffs who had standing have since been promoted, and their claims of lost seniority are unsupported by the collective bargaining agreement.
• McKEE v. Turner
  491 F.2d 1106· 9th Cir.· 1974-01-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim for an apology, rather than monetary damages, rendered the case de minimis and not a justiciable controversy.
• White v. Sullivan
  474 F.2d 16· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-22 ·cited 4×
  A prisoner not currently in solitary confinement has standing to sue on behalf of those threatened with solitary confinement and denial of access to courts.
• Spriggs v. Wilson
  467 F.2d 382· D.C. Cir.· 1972-07-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's action for declaratory judgment was not proper because there was no actual controversy, and he was not a member of the class he sought to represent.
• Cowne v. James E. Weber ad litem of the Estate of Robert R. Snodgrass
  257 So. 2d 105· Fla. 4th DCA· 1972-01-21 ·cited 4×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's declaratory judgment regarding inheritance rights under an antenuptial agreement, holding that a court lacks authority to issue a declaration of rights when no justiciable controversy exists. The court affirmed the dis
• Pegues v. Mrs. Louis K. Bakane & Art Rice Realty Co.
  445 F.2d 1140· 5th Cir.· 1971-07-27 ·cited 4×
  The appeal from the denial of a preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot because the property in question was sold to the plaintiffs, rendering the primary relief sought unavailable.
• Reddick v. Christie
  226 So. 2d 434· Fla. 4th DCA· 1969-09-22 ·cited 4×
  In this construction contract dispute, a general contractor filed a suit titled "Petition for Declaratory Decree" against building owners and subcontractors seeking payment for construction work. The trial court awarded judgment to the contractor and subcontractors, but the appel
• Lebowich v. O'Connor
  309 F.2d 111· 2d Cir.· 1962-09-20 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the complaint, holding that the district court did not err in declining to exercise jurisdiction for declaratory relief.
• Merlin M. Evans v. Watson
  269 F.2d 775· D.C. Cir.· 1959-07-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Commissioner of Patents had the lawful authority to promulgate a rule prohibiting advertising to solicit patent business, and that the regulation was not unreasonable or invalid.