Liberal Construction Of Remedial Statutes

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

• Mrs. Roger McMillan Reeb v. Econ. Opportunity Atlanta, Inc.
  516 F.2d 924· 5th Cir.· 1975-08-04 ·cited 190×
  The ninety-day period for filing an EEOC charge under Title VII is not a strict jurisdictional prerequisite and can be subject to equitable tolling and estoppel when the facts supporting the claim were not reasonably discoverable within that period, especially if the employer eng
• Bellsouth Telecomms., Inc. v. Meeks
  863 So. 2d 287· Fla.· 2003-10-16 ·cited 138×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that damages recoverable by a minor child under section 768.21(3) for loss of parental companionship and mental pain and suffering are not limited to the period of minority, but should be calculated based on the joint life expectancies of the minor
• Culpepper v. Reynolds Metals Co.
  421 F.2d 888· 5th Cir.· 1970-01-08 ·cited 136×
  The court held that the statute of limitations for filing a Title VII claim is tolled when an employee invokes contractual grievance remedies, and that preliminary injunctive relief is available to individual litigants under Title VII.
• Pittston Stevedoring Corp. & the Home Ins. Co. v. Dellaventura
  544 F.2d 35· 2d Cir.· 1976-07-01 ·cited 128×
  The court held that the 1972 amendments to the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act were intended to cover injuries occurring during loading and unloading between the ship and the first point of rest, and not thereafter.
• Cordette Woodham v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield OF Fla., Inc.
  829 So. 2d 891· Fla.· 2002-10-10 ·cited 110×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that an EEOC dismissal notice stating it was "unable to conclude" violations occurred does not constitute a "no cause" determination under Florida's Civil Rights Act, and therefore does not bar a claimant from filing suit in circuit court when the n
• Rosario Donato v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co.
  767 So. 2d 1146· Fla.· 2000-01-20 ·cited 101×
  The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question from the Eleventh Circuit regarding whether the Florida Civil Rights Act recognizes marital status discrimination where an employee is terminated because of actions taken by the employee's spouse. The Court held that 'marita
• Bennett v. Berg
  710 F.2d 1361· 8th Cir.· 1983-07-11 ·cited 81×
  The court held that plaintiffs have standing to assert RICO civil remedies and have sufficiently alleged an enterprise distinct from the pattern of racketeering, but affirmed dismissal of the equitable relief claim.
• Barnes v. Costle
  561 F.2d 983· D.C. Cir.· 1977-07-27 ·cited 69×
  The court held that conditioning employment benefits upon an employee's submission to a supervisor's sexual demands constitutes sex discrimination under Title VII, even if gender is not the sole factor.
• Manning v. State
  452 So. 2d 136· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-06-21 ·cited 63×
  A trial court may depart from sentencing guidelines based on clear and convincing reasons relating to the temporal and geographical circumstances of the offenses for which convictions have been obtained. Rule 3.701(d)(11) precludes departure only when based on factors related to
• Baker v. Stuart Broad. Co.
  560 F.2d 389· 8th Cir.· 1977-08-11 ·cited 57×
  The court held that two corporations should be consolidated for the purposes of the employer definition under Title VII if they meet the National Labor Relations Board standards, even if they are legally separate entities.
• Rutherford v. Am. Bank OF Commerce
  565 F.2d 1162· 10th Cir.· 1977-11-21 ·cited 55×
  The court held that Section 704(a) of Title VII prohibits an employer from retaliating against a former employee by disclosing to a prospective employer that the former employee filed a discrimination charge.
• N. & L. Auto Parts Co. & Great Am. Indem. Co. v. Doman
  111 So. 2d 270· Fla. 1st DCA· 1959-01-29 ·cited 54×
  An employee on an out-of-town business trip who temporarily deviates for a completed private errand remains in the course of employment upon return to the employer-provided lodging, and injuries sustained at that location while attending to normal necessities are compensable even
• Mahramas v. Am. Exp. Isbrandtsen Lines, Inc.
  475 F.2d 165· 2d Cir.· 1973-02-22 ·cited 47×
  The dissenting judge argues that a shipowner remains liable under the Jones Act for a seaman's injury, even if the seaman is employed by a concessionaire, because the shipowner retains sufficient control and the Jones Act should be liberally construed.
• Miss. Coast Marine, Inc. v. Bosarge
  637 F.2d 994· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-17 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, as amended in 1972, applies to recreational boat builders and small pleasure craft marinas, and that a claimant's subsequent heart attacks are compensable if causally related to the initial work injury.
• Hart v. J. T. Baker Chem. Co.
  598 F.2d 829· 3d Cir.· 1979-05-14 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the time limits for filing a charge under Title VII are not jurisdictional but are subject to equitable tolling, but affirmed the lower court's refusal to toll the time period in this specific case.
• Moses v. Falstaff Brewing Corp.
  525 F.2d 92· 8th Cir.· 1975-11-04 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the appellant complied with the notice requirement of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act because the official administrative termination date, not the earlier notice of discharge, should be used to calculate the 180-day period.
• Phillips v. Interior Bd. OF Mine Operations Appeals
  500 F.2d 772· D.C. Cir.· 1974-06-20 ·cited 46×
  A miner's discharge is violative of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act when it results from notifying management or a safety committee of dangerous working conditions, even if not formally reported to the Secretary of Interior.
• Rice v. Hamilton AIR Force Base Commissary
  720 F.2d 1082· 9th Cir.· 1983-11-21 ·cited 44×
  A pro se litigant's request for appointment of counsel, filed within the jurisdictional time limit and containing a description of the claim and administrative dispositions, can be considered the filing of a civil action under Title VII, and the proper defendant can be identified
• Reich v. DOW Badische Co. & Dow Chem. Co.
  575 F.2d 363· 2d Cir.· 1978-04-04 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the time limitations for filing a notice of intent to sue under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) are strict preconditions to filing a civil action, not statutes of limitation subject to equitable modification.
• Wilkes v. Miss. River Sand & Gravel Co.
  202 F.2d 383· 6th Cir.· 1953-03-03 ·cited 39×
• Leslie S. Bowden in Bankr. for the Est. of Frank T. Hickey, Inc. v. United States for the use of Emmett J. Malloy
  239 F.2d 572· 9th Cir.· 1956-12-31 ·cited 38×
  The court held that a letter from a subcontractor to the prime contractor, authorizing payment to a supplier, does not constitute sufficient written notice under the Miller Act for the supplier to sue on the payment bond, as the notice must be sent by or on the authority of the s
• Seldon Davidson v. Gardner
  370 F.2d 803· 6th Cir.· 1966-12-28 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Secretary erred in strictly construing disability provisions and in requiring objective medical evidence for impairments, especially pain, and that a man suffering constant pain is not obliged to engage in substantial gainful activity.
• Williams v. Fla. Indus. Comm'n & Mun. Auto Sales, Inc.
  135 So. 2d 435· Fla. 3d DCA· 1961-12-18 ·cited 36×
  Nathaniel Williams sought unemployment benefits after voluntarily leaving his job to attend his sister's funeral in South Carolina. The Florida Industrial Commission denied benefits, finding he left without good cause, but the appellate court reversed, holding that his familial o
• United States v. Aceto Agric. Chems. Corp.
  872 F.2d 1373· 8th Cir.· 1989-04-25 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' allegations were sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss under both CERCLA and RCRA, reversing the district court's dismissal under RCRA and affirming its denial of dismissal under CERCLA.
• Huston v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  477 F.2d 1003· 8th Cir.· 1973-04-25 ·cited 34×
  The court held that presenting a request for appointment of an attorney within the 30-day period specified in Title VII constitutes the bringing of a civil action, thereby tolling the statute of limitations.
• Hampton Roads Stevedoring Corp. v. O'Hearne
  184 F.2d 76· 4th Cir.· 1950-08-07 ·cited 34×
  The amendment to the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, effective after the injury but before death, applies to death benefits because a new cause of action arises at death. The court also found substantial evidence supported the Commissioner's finding that the
• Coffee v. United States
  157 F.2d 968· 5th Cir.· 1946-11-18 ·cited 32×
  A written notice of a claim against a payment bond, exhibited to the contractor by the claimant and examined and discussed by the contractor, constitutes sufficient notice under the Miller Act, even if not served by registered mail.
• Glassell-Taylor Co. v. Magnolia Petroleum Co. Magnolia Petroleum Co. V. Glassell-Taylor Co.
  153 F.2d 527· 5th Cir.· 1946-01-23 ·cited 32×
  The court held that materials furnished to a subcontractor are covered by a payment bond under the Miller Act if supplied in the prosecution of the work, even if not all materials were ultimately used on-site or delivered directly to the job site, and that the Act should be liber
• Gilbert v. Dep't OF Corr. & Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n
  696 So. 2d 416· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-06-27 ·cited 30×
  Martha Lee Gilbert was terminated by the Department of Corrections for excessive absenteeism during her probationary period as a correctional officer. The Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission denied her unemployment benefits, but the court reversed, holding that her absences c
• McCOMB v. Super-A Fertilizer Works, Inc.
  165 F.2d 824· 1st Cir.· 1948-01-27 ·cited 30×
  Employees engaged in producing fertilizer for sugarcane, where the resulting sugar is exported, are covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act as engaged in an occupation necessary to the production of goods for commerce.
• Newman v. Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't of Labor
  745 F.2d 1162· 8th Cir.· 1984-10-03 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the administrative law judge erred in attributing the claimant's respiratory symptoms to heart disease and in inadequately analyzing pulmonary function studies and medical opinions, necessitating a remand.
• Dolphin Tire Co. & Sentry Ins. Co. v. Ellison
  402 So. 2d 36· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-07-29 ·cited 28×
  The court held that an employer/carrier is liable for attorney's fees under Section 440.34(2)(c) when they deny a catastrophic injury occurred, even if they admit some compensable injury, and the claimant prevails.
• Koon v. Boulder Cnty.
  494 So. 2d 1126· Fla.· 1986-08-28 ·cited 27×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts by holding that under the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), a responding state court may modify a sister state's child support order upward to reflect the current needs of the obligee and c
• Kearns v. Farmer Acquisition Co.
  157 So. 3d 458· Fla. 2d DCA· 2015-02-11 ·cited 26×
  Sean Kearns sued his employer Charlotte Honda under Florida's Whistleblower's Act after being fired for refusing to participate in fraudulent loan practices. The trial court granted a directed verdict against Kearns, but the Second District reversed, holding that Kearns presented
• Marshall v. Whirlpool Corp. & Empire-Detroit Steel Div.
  593 F.2d 715· 6th Cir.· 1979-02-22 ·cited 26×
  The Secretary of Labor's regulation protecting employees who refuse to work in good faith belief of serious danger is valid and consistent with the Occupational Safety & Health Act.
• ST. JOE Paper Co. v. Gautreaux
  180 So. 2d 668· Fla. 1st DCA· 1965-12-07 ·cited 26×
  This case addresses whether an employee forced to retire at age 65 under a mandatory retirement provision in a collective bargaining agreement "voluntarily" left employment for purposes of unemployment compensation disqualification. The court held that mandatory retirement does n
• City OF Fort Lauderdale v. Hardrives Co.
  167 So. 2d 339· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-09-18 ·cited 26×
  A contractor's bond under § 255.05, F.S.A., does not cover materialmen supplying materials to a sub-subcontractor.
• Decker v. Anheuser-Busch
  632 F.2d 1221· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the 90-day period for filing suit commences when the aggrieved person, not their attorney, receives notice of the right to sue.
• T. F. Scholes, Inc. v. United States for the Use of H. W. Moore Equip. Co.
  295 F.2d 366· 10th Cir.· 1961-09-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the notice provided was sufficient in substance and timeliness under the Miller Act, and that the evidence supported a reasonable approximation of damages awarded.
• Fla. Indus. Comm'n & Mirtie S. Taylor v. Growers Equip. Co.
  152 Fla. 595· Fla.· 1943-03-23 ·cited 24×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision denying unemployment compensation to a canning plant worker, holding that her employment in a commercial canning operation was not exempt 'agricultural labor' under unemployment compensation statutes, even though the raw m
• Polly Ann Powell v. Tucson AIR Museum Found. OF Pima Cnty.
  771 F.2d 1309· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-18 ·cited 23×
  The dissent argues that the FLSA should apply to the Tucson Air Museum because it constitutes an 'activity of a public agency' under 29 U.S.C. § 203(s)(6), despite the majority's restrictive interpretation.
• Wirtz v. Columbian Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  380 F.2d 903· 6th Cir.· 1967-06-23 ·cited 23×
  The court held that an insurance company operating its home office in a building it owns and leases to others constitutes an 'enterprise' under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and its investment income counts towards the $1,000,000 gross volume of sales threshold.
• Walling v. Rutherford Food Corp.
  156 F.2d 513· 10th Cir.· 1946-07-18 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the boners were employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act and that the trial court should have issued an injunction against further violations.
• Bess Kennedy v. Whitehurst
  690 F.2d 951· D.C. Cir.· 1982-09-17 ·cited 22×
  Federal employees who successfully resolve age discrimination claims at the administrative level under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) are not entitled to recover attorneys' fees for legal services rendered during that administrative stage.
• Ina M. Baeza v. PAN American/National Airlines, Inc.
  392 So. 2d 920· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-12-02 ·cited 22×
  Twenty-four Pan American/National Airlines flight attendants appealed the Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission's denial of unemployment compensation benefits during mandatory maternity leave, arguing that sick pay received during such leave should not disqualify them from bene
• Munsey v. Rogers C. B. Morton
  507 F.2d 1202· D.C. Cir.· 1974-12-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Board of Mine Operations Appeals erred in failing to consider whether the mine operator's refusal to rehire the miners constituted discrimination under Section 110(b)(1) of the Act, and that complaints to foremen could be protected activity.
• Easttam v. The Sec'y OF Health
  364 F.2d 509· 8th Cir.· 1966-08-11 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Secretary's denial of disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence, and therefore affirmed the lower court's decision.
• Mitchell v. The Kroger Co.
  248 F.2d 935· 8th Cir.· 1957-11-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that store auditors who travel between states to audit retail stores are engaged in commerce under the Fair Labor Standards Act and are not exempt under the retail establishment exemption because they are employed by the chain's central operations, not individual s
• Casavantes v. Cal. State Univ.
  732 F.2d 1441· 9th Cir.· 1984-05-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that an EEOC Intake Questionnaire, when timely filed and later amended to cure technical defects, is sufficient to constitute a charge under Title VII, thereby satisfying the administrative filing requirement.
• Reliable Coal Corp. v. Rogers C. B. Morton
  478 F.2d 257· 4th Cir.· 1973-05-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 eliminated the distinction between gassy and nongassy mines, and modifications to safety standards cannot dilute the protection afforded by the Act.