Lex Loci Delicti

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

• Althea G. Bishop and William J. Bishop, Sr. v. Fla. Specialty Paint Co.
  389 So. 2d 999· Fla.· 1980-10-23 ·cited 244×
  The Florida Supreme Court abandoned the rigid lex loci delicti rule (applying the law of the place where injury occurred) in favor of a flexible "significant relationships test" for determining applicable law in tort cases. The court rejected the automatic application of South Ca
• Helene Curtis Indus., Inc. v. Edd Pruitt and Marjorie Ann Pruitt
  385 F.2d 841· 5th Cir.· 1967-10-20 ·cited 140×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to establish that the mixture of products was defective or unreasonably dangerous, and that the plaintiff was not within the class of intended users for the products.
• Vanity Fair Mills, Inc. v. The T. Eaton Co. Ltd. & John David Eaton
  234 F.2d 633· 2d Cir.· 1956-06-01 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the Lanham Act does not provide extraterritorial remedies against foreign nationals acting under valid foreign trademarks in their home country, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing claims arising in Canada under the doctrine
• Hopkins v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp.
  201 So. 2d 743· Fla.· 1967-02-01 ·cited 79×
  The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question from the Fifth Circuit regarding which state's wrongful death law applies when a plane crash occurs in Illinois but involves a Florida resident passenger, Florida domiciliary executrix, and California manufacturer defendant.
• Gen. Dynamics Corp. v. Selb Mfg. Co.
  481 F.2d 1204· 8th Cir.· 1973-07-30 ·cited 77×
  The court affirmed the trial court's decision to dismiss counterclaims and strike affirmative defenses due to non-compliance with discovery orders, finding no abuse of discretion. It also affirmed the application of Texas substantive law to the tort claim.
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Olsen
  406 So. 2d 1109· Fla.· 1981-11-25 ·cited 72×
  State Farm sought declaratory judgment that Illinois's contributory negligence law should bar recovery in an uninsured motorist claim arising from a fatal accident in Illinois involving a Florida resident. The Florida Supreme Court held that Illinois law controls under the "signi
• Bates v. Cook, Inc.
  509 So. 2d 1112· Fla.· 1987-07-16 ·cited 63×
  The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question from the Eleventh Circuit regarding whether Florida's borrowing statute applies to trade secret theft claims. The Court held that the significant relationships test, rather than the traditional lex loci delicti rule, should
• Bowen v. United States
  570 F.2d 1311· 7th Cir.· 1978-02-09 ·cited 60×
  Under Indiana law, a final administrative determination that a pilot violated aviation regulations by flying into known icing conditions can collaterally estop the pilot from relitigating that issue in a Federal Tort Claims Act suit, and such a violation constitutes contributory
• Sys. Operations, Inc. v. Sci. Games Dev. Corp.
  555 F.2d 1131· 3d Cir.· 1977-05-03 ·cited 59×
  The court held that the district court erred in placing the burden of proving falsity on the defendant and in failing to require a security bond, thus reversing the preliminary injunction.
• Pearson v. Ne. Airlines, Inc.
  309 F.2d 553· 2d Cir.· 1962-07-11 ·cited 56×
  A federal court sitting in New York may constitutionally apply New York's public policy regarding wrongful death recovery limits, even when the cause of action arises under a Massachusetts statute with a lower limit, provided New York has substantial contacts with the transaction
• Kramer v. Piper Aircraft Corp.
  520 So. 2d 37· Fla.· 1988-02-11 ·cited 55×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that strict liability in tort, adopted in West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., supplants and abolishes the common law cause of action for breach of implied warranty in cases involving personal injury absent privity of contract. The court answered a cert
• Ellis v. Great Sw. Corp.
  646 F.2d 1099· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-05 ·cited 54×
  The court held that when a case is transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) or § 1404(a) due to lack of personal jurisdiction in the transferor court, the transferee court must apply the choice of law rules of the state in which it sits.
• Tierney A. O'Rourke v. E. AIR Lines, Inc.
  730 F.2d 842· 2d Cir.· 1984-03-02 ·cited 53×
  The court should have awarded prejudgment interest to the plaintiff on the $75,000 award.
• In re AIR Crash Disaster Near Chicago
  644 F.2d 594· 7th Cir.· 1981-01-05 ·cited 51×
  The court held that under applicable state choice-of-law rules, punitive damages cannot be allowed against either the manufacturer or the airline in these wrongful death actions.
• Hopkins v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp.
  358 F.2d 347· 5th Cir.· 1966-03-24 ·cited 46×
  The court certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question of whether Florida courts would apply the monetary limitation of the Illinois death statute in a Florida-based action for a death occurring in Illinois.
• Seguros Tepeyac v. Maynard Bostrom and James L. Jernigan
  347 F.2d 168· 5th Cir.· 1965-06-16 ·cited 44×
  A claimant cannot sue the insurer directly for the amount of a judgment exceeding policy limits under the Texas Stowers doctrine unless the insured has paid some portion of that excess judgment.
• ThunderWave, Inc. v. Carnival Corp.
  954 F. Supp. 1562· S.D. Fla.· 1997-01-23 ·cited 42×
  The court granted dismissal for tortious interference and misrepresentation claims but denied dismissal for unjust enrichment claims.
• Tyminski v. United States
  481 F.2d 257· 3d Cir.· 1973-06-19 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act statute of limitations did not bar the claim, as the claimant did not discover the malpractice within the limitations period. The court also held that damages for gratuitous nursing services should be allowed.
• Turcotte v. Ford Motor Co.
  494 F.2d 173· 1st Cir.· 1974-02-13 ·cited 40×
  The court clarified that a settlement and release do not automatically make parties joint tortfeasors, and the determination of negligence is still required.
• Strauss v. Douglas Aircraft Co.
  404 F.2d 1152· 2d Cir.· 1968-12-12 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing the defendant to amend its answer to raise a statute of limitations defense due to the substantial prejudice caused by the defendant's excessive delay.
• Parker v. Wideman
  380 F.2d 433· 5th Cir.· 1967-06-29 ·cited 40×
  A jury verdict awarding no damages for substantial injuries, despite uncontroverted evidence of those injuries, cannot stand.
• Van Sant v. Am. Express Co.
  169 F.2d 355· 3d Cir.· 1947-10-21 ·cited 40×
  The court held that amendments to pleadings to properly allege diversity jurisdiction are permissible, and a statute of limitations defense is waived if not timely pleaded.
• Gray F. Madison, Sr. v. Deseret Livestock Co.
  574 F.2d 1027· 10th Cir.· 1978-04-14 ·cited 38×
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the landowner's knowledge of a dangerous condition, precluding summary judgment for the landowner on the negligence claim. The court also affirmed summary judgment for the landowner on the wife's consortium and
• Boland v. Love
  222 F.2d 27· D.C. Cir.· 1955-03-17 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the owner of a car is not liable for the negligent operation of the vehicle by an employee who stole it and drove it off the premises without permission, even if the owner knew of the employee's prior criminal record.
• Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Bendix-Westinghouse Auto. AIR Brake Co.
  372 F.2d 18· 3d Cir.· 1966-12-15 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the Pennsylvania borrowing statute required application of Florida's statute of limitations, which barred the indemnity action as untimely.
• Mattox v. News Syndicate Co., Inc.
  176 F.2d 897· 2d Cir.· 1949-03-11 ·cited 34×
  The court held that its prior decision correctly applied Virginia law to determine damages in a libel action, adhering to the single publication rule's principles regarding statutes of limitations and multiplicity of suits.
• Decker v. Great Am. Ins. Co.
  392 So. 2d 965· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-12-31 ·cited 32×
  The Deckers were injured by an uninsured motorist while driving a company vehicle insured under a fleet policy issued in Ohio and Georgia. The court reversed a declaratory judgment that denied underinsured motorist coverage, holding that Florida's uninsured motorist statute (sect
• Best Canvas Prods. & Supplies, Inc. v. Ploof Truck Lines, Inc.
  713 F.2d 618· 11th Cir.· 1983-08-29 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Ploof's motion to amend its counterclaim and in granting summary judgment for Norton.
• Hiram Walker & Sons, Inc. v. Line
  877 F.2d 1508· 11th Cir.· 1989-07-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment against Indian River and in its determination regarding Eller's entitlement to COGSA limitations, requiring remand for further proceedings.
• Crowder v. Gordons Transports, Inc.
  387 F.2d 413· 8th Cir.· 1967-12-29 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the amended complaint relates back to the original filing date under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and thus the action was timely commenced.
• Tramontana v. S. A. Empresa de Viacao Aerea RIO Grandense
  350 F.2d 468· D.C. Cir.· 1965-06-10 ·cited 28×
• O'Neill v. Cunard White Star
  160 F.2d 446· 2d Cir.· 1947-03-05 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the Jones Act does not apply to claims by alien seamen injured on the high seas aboard foreign vessels, even if the seaman is domiciled in the U.S. and has filed for citizenship.
• Andrews v. Cont'l Ins. Co.
  444 So. 2d 479· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-01-05 ·cited 27×
  In a conflict of laws case, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's application of Florida law to an insurance dispute and held that Maine law applies to an uninsured motorist claim under a Maine insurance policy issued to Maine residents. The key issue wa
• Judge v. Am. Motors Corp.
  908 F.2d 1565· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-21 ·cited 26×
  The court held that Florida's choice-of-law principles, guided by the Restatement (Second), require applying Florida law to the wrongful death claim because Mexico's interest in applying its law is slight and applying Mexican law would completely bar the claim.
• Smith v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.
  382 F.2d 190· 10th Cir.· 1967-08-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the plaintiff waived the right to appeal the jury instruction by failing to object after the instructions were given, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 51.
• Walton v. Arabian Am. OIL Co.
  233 F.2d 541· 2d Cir.· 1956-05-15 ·cited 26×
  A plaintiff suing in a diversity action for a tort committed in a foreign country must prove the foreign country's law, and failure to do so warrants dismissal, even if the defendant is better positioned to obtain that information.
• Scott v. E. AIR Lines, Inc.
  399 F.2d 14· 3d Cir.· 1967-03-30 ·cited 25×
  The court affirmed the judgment of the district court regarding the award of damages.
• Liechti v. Roche
  198 F.2d 174· 5th Cir.· 1952-07-31 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the judge, not the jury, has the function to determine the state of foreign law, and thus the trial court did not err in refusing to submit the issue of Panamanian law regarding damages for pain and suffering to the jury.
• Foster v. United States
  768 F.2d 1278· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that Illinois law, not Florida law, should apply to determine the beneficiaries of the wrongful death action because Illinois had the most significant relationship to the issue.
• Komlos v. Compagnie Nationale Air France
  209 F.2d 436· 2d Cir.· 1953-12-30 ·cited 23×
• Rosenthal v. Warren
  475 F.2d 438· 2d Cir.· 1973-02-13 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge holds that New York courts would apply the Massachusetts wrongful death damage limitation, and that refusing to do so violates the Full Faith and Credit Clause.
• Pittway Corp. v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp.
  641 F.2d 524· 7th Cir.· 1981-02-23 ·cited 21×
  The court held that Illinois law, not Wisconsin law, governs the case because Illinois has the most significant relationship to the litigation, and Wisconsin has little legitimate interest.
• Sylvania Elec. Prods., Inc. v. Barker
  228 F.2d 842· 1st Cir.· 1955-12-20 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the judgments for the plaintiff, finding that the jury's verdict rendered any potential error in the jury instructions harmless.
• Ramsay v. The Boeing Co.
  432 F.2d 592· 5th Cir.· 1970-08-26 ·cited 19×
• Iordanis Anastasiadis v. S.S. Little John
  346 F.2d 281· 5th Cir.· 1965-06-07 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining jurisdiction over a dispute between a foreign seaman and a foreign-flagged vessel, where the contract stipulated Greek law and courts.
• Mansfield Hardwood Lumber Co. v. Hattie A. Johnson
  268 F.2d 317· 5th Cir.· 1959-06-16 ·cited 19×
  The court held that Louisiana law, specifically its broad interpretation of fraud under Article 1847 of the Civil Code, can encompass breaches of fiduciary duty, even without explicit common-law "constructive fraud" or equitable remedies like constructive trusts, when there is su
• Harris v. Polskie Linie Lotnicze
  820 F.2d 1000· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that Polish law, rather than California law, properly governed the calculation of damages in a wrongful death action arising under the Warsaw Convention and FSIA, and that the district court's calculation of damages under Polish law was not clearly erroneous.
• Fort Howard Paper Co. v. William D. Witter, Inc.
  787 F.2d 784· 2d Cir.· 1986-03-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the motion to stay/transfer the declaratory judgment action and correctly applied New York law to the contract claims, finding them barred by the Statute of Frauds. However, the court reversed the dismissal of the fraud claim
• Schum v. Charles P. Bailey, M.D.
  578 F.2d 493· 3d Cir.· 1978-05-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court should have applied the New Jersey statute of limitations, not the New York statute, because New Jersey had a substantial interest in the case as the plaintiff's domicile and the location of the defendant's medical practice.
• Mannsz v. MacWhyte Co.
  155 F.2d 445· 3d Cir.· 1946-05-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove breach of express warranty or negligence because the wire rope was not used for a purpose intended by the manufacturer, and there was insufficient evidence of a manufacturing defect.