Nominal Damages

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

• Dwyer v. Regan
  777 F.2d 825· 2d Cir.· 1985-11-21 ·cited 40×
  The court held that while the complaint adequately alleged a property interest, it did not sufficiently allege a request for a pretermination hearing, and thus remanded to allow amendment. The court also noted that Regan's actions were not random or unauthorized as per Parratt/Hu
• Davis v. W. Cmty. Hosp.
  755 F.2d 455· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-21 ·cited 40×
  The court held that Dr. Davis's letters were not protected speech, reversing his First Amendment claim, but affirmed his procedural due process claim. It also reversed his libel claim due to the jury finding the statements true and remanded for nominal damages on his equal protec
• Dep't OF Transp. v. Weisenfeld
  617 So. 2d 1071· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-03-26 ·cited 39×
  Summary judgment on liability for a temporary regulatory taking cannot be granted without evidence that a regulatory action deprived the owner of all or substantial economic use of the affected property. A regulation that goes too far may constitute a taking, but only if the owne
• Sims v. Mulcahy
  902 F.2d 524· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-09 ·cited 38×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding no abuse of discretion in evidentiary rulings and that jury instructions adequately covered the plaintiff's claims.
• Santiago v. Nestor Velazquez Garcia
  821 F.2d 822· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-05 ·cited 38×
  The court held that a prison regulation creating procedural rights for inmate transfers can create a liberty interest protected by due process, and a violation of these procedures, specifically a delayed post-transfer hearing, constitutes a due process violation for which damages
• McCULLOCH v. Glasgow
  620 F.2d 47· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-23 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the state claim damages award was improper due to erroneous jury instructions regarding adverse possession against a municipality, and the federal due process claim damages award was also improper due to uncertainty in the jury's findings regarding actual vers
• Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Sokolowski
  439 So. 2d 932· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-10-11 ·cited 37×
  Police officers challenged disciplinary suspensions imposed without timely appeal hearings as required by county code. The court held that officers had a protected property interest in continued employment and were denied procedural due process through hearing delays exceeding 12
• Teen-Ed, Inc. v. Kimball Int'l, Inc.
  620 F.2d 399· 3d Cir.· 1980-04-23 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the trial court erred in precluding a lay witness's testimony regarding lost profits solely because the witness was not identified as an expert, when the testimony was based on personal knowledge and admissible under Rule 701.
• Auwood v. Harry Brandt Booking Off., Inc.
  850 F.2d 884· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-17 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the district court erred in reducing the jury's damage award, and that the award should be modified to include treble damages less settlement amounts.
• Lubbock Civil Liberties Union v. Lubbock Indep. Sch. Dist.
  669 F.2d 1038· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-11 ·cited 36×
  The court held that allowing voluntary student religious meetings before or after school hours, under the guise of a public forum or secular purpose, violates the Establishment Clause due to impermissible advancement of religion and entanglement with religious activities.
• Murphy Tugboat Co. v. Crowley
  658 F.2d 1256· 9th Cir.· 1981-05-11 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the plaintiff's damages theory for lost past and future profits was based on speculation and insufficient evidence, and that the RSPA agreement did not constitute an antitrust violation actionable by the plaintiff.
• Muroff v. Dill
  386 So. 2d 1281· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-08-06 ·cited 36×
  The Muroffs appealed a trial court order denying their motion for judgment n.o.v. and granting a partial new trial on damages in a breach of contract case. The court affirmed, holding that appellees were entitled to nominal damages despite insufficient evidence on the proper meas
• Olympia Hotels Corp. v. Johnson WAX Dev. Corp.
  908 F.2d 1363· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-20 ·cited 35×
  A federal magistrate cannot conduct voir dire in a civil jury trial without the parties' consent, and such an error is not subject to the harmless error rule. The doctrine of election of remedies, in its substantive aspect, prevents double recovery but does not bar a party from a
• Parrish v. Johnson
  800 F.2d 600· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying Giles' First and Eighth Amendment claims and in awarding only nominal damages to Parrish for his First Amendment violations. The court reversed the denial of Giles' claims and remanded for further proceedings on damages.
• Williams v. Mensey
  785 F.2d 631· 8th Cir.· 1986-03-07 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to establish county liability under § 1983, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion regarding discovery, mistrial, evidence admission, or damage and fee awards.
• Fast v. The Sch. Dist. OF City OF Ladue
  728 F.2d 1030· 8th Cir.· 1984-02-23 ·cited 34×
  A plaintiff is a prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 if they succeed on any significant issue that achieves some of the benefit sought, even if not all claims are won.
• Owen v. Lash
  682 F.2d 648· 7th Cir.· 1982-06-28 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the District Court erred in characterizing the violation as procedural due process and in awarding only nominal damages, and that the issue of qualified immunity for the individual defendant was not properly addressed.
• Milwe v. Cavuoto
  653 F.2d 80· 2d Cir.· 1981-06-25 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, as its reasoning was based on an overly restrictive interpretation of precedent and failed to consider key factors.
• Nat'l Rating Bureau, Inc. v. Fla. Power Corp.
  94 So. 2d 809· Fla.· 1956-12-19 ·cited 34×
  National Rating Bureau sought to enjoin Florida Power Corporation from occupying a strip of land and recover damages for tree cutting. The Florida Supreme Court held that an abutting property owner has a property interest in trees along a rural street and can recover damages from
• Tedder v. Riggin
  65 Fla. 153· Fla.· 1913-02-11 ·cited 34×
  This case concerns an agent who allegedly misrepresented his authority to sell land on behalf of a corporation. The court held that the agent is liable for damages resulting from his misrepresentation of authority, but not for the anticipated commissions lost due to the principal
• Alphamed Pharms. Corp. v. Arriva Pharms., Inc.
  432 F. Supp. 2d 1319· S.D. Fla.· 2006-05-26 ·cited 33×
  The court granted defendants' motions for judgment as a matter of law and new trial, vacating the jury's verdict because the plaintiff failed to present legally sufficient evidence linking the defendants' conduct to any damages.
• Cont'l Dev. Corp. OF Fla. v. Duval Title & Abstract Co.
  356 So. 2d 925· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-03-29 ·cited 33×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in requiring proof of actual malice for a slander of title claim, this error was harmless because the plaintiff failed to prove special damages. The court affirmed the award for the defendant on its counterclaim.
• Audio Fid., Inc. v. High Fid. Recordings, Inc.
  283 F.2d 551· 9th Cir.· 1960-10-29 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the deliberate copying of a record jacket's distinctive, non-functional design, even if the product itself is generic, can constitute unfair competition under California law if it is likely to cause public confusion.
• Destiny Constr. Co. v. Martin K. EBY Constr.
  662 So. 2d 388· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-11-03 ·cited 32×
  Destiny Construction sued Eby Construction for breach of a subcontract to install underground piping, claiming $1.1+ million in damages from delayed payments and project delays. The trial court granted summary judgment for Eby after striking Destiny's complaint as a sham pleading
• Jasperson v. Purolator Courier Corp.
  765 F.2d 736· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-24 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the amended service letter statute applies retrospectively, limiting punitive damages to failure to issue a letter, and that the plaintiff failed to prove actual damages.
• Brandon v. Allen
  719 F.2d 151· 6th Cir.· 1983-10-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that Director Chapman is entitled to qualified immunity and reversed the finding of liability against him, but remanded the case to recalculate damages against Officer Allen to include dignitary harm.
• United States ex rel. David Tyrrell v. Speaker
  535 F.2d 823· 3d Cir.· 1976-05-07 ·cited 32×
  The court held that placing a pretrial detainee in administrative segregation with significantly more restricted conditions than convicted prisoners, without a showing of necessity for trial appearance or security, violates the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause. The court
• Mayor & City Council of Baltimore v. United States
  147 F.2d 786· 4th Cir.· 1945-02-09 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the City of Baltimore was entitled only to nominal damages for the taking of its interest in public alleys, as its interest was not equivalent to full ownership and the value was reflected in the abutting properties.
• Magnett v. Pelletier
  488 F.2d 33· 1st Cir.· 1973-11-26 ·cited 31×
  The court held that $500 is not a proper amount for nominal damages in a civil rights action, as nominal damages are a token sum for technical violations without provable loss.
• Nicholas v. Miami Burglar Alarm Co., Inc.
  266 So. 2d 64· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-08-22 ·cited 31×
  A burglar alarm company's customer sued for damages from a burglary, claiming breach of contract, breach of implied warranty, and negligent maintenance. The trial court dismissed all counts, but the appellate court reversed in part, holding that while the company cannot be liable
• Rutig v. Lake JEM Land Co.
  155 Fla. 420· Fla.· 1945-01-12 ·cited 31×
  Rutig and Webster appealed a judgment dismissing their breach of contract and breach of covenant claims against Lake Jem Land Co. arising from delays in providing access to and preparing leased agricultural land. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that the declaration st
• R & B Holding Co., Inc. v. Christopher Advertising Grp., Inc.
  994 So. 2d 329· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-04-04 ·cited 30×
  In this conversion and civil theft case, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's use of replacement cost as the damages measure for advertising materials not reproduced by the plaintiff over ten years after conversion. The court held that fair market
• Gamma Dev. Corp. v. Steinberg
  621 So. 2d 718· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-05-26 ·cited 30×
  Gamma Development Corporation appealed the dismissal with prejudice of its civil theft and conversion claims against an attorney and law firm that had applied escrowed funds to pay attorney fees. The court reversed, holding that dismissal with prejudice was improper because nomin
• Matherne v. Wilson
  851 F.2d 752· 5th Cir.· 1988-08-10 ·cited 30×
  A public official is entitled to qualified immunity if a reasonable officer would have believed their actions met constitutional standards, and the law was not clearly established at the time of the action. A public employer cannot fire an employee for political activity if it do
• Saxner v. Benson
  727 F.2d 669· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-13 ·cited 30×
  Prison disciplinary committee members are not entitled to absolute immunity, as their functions and procedures do not meet the standards required for such immunity, and public policy does not necessitate it.
• Crawford v. Garnier
  719 F.2d 1317· 7th Cir.· 1983-09-26 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the jury's finding that the plaintiff's article was a substantial motivating factor in his termination was supported by substantial evidence, and that the admission of certain statements by an employment analyst was proper.
• Ward v. Johnson
  690 F.2d 1098· 4th Cir.· 1982-10-07 ·cited 30×
• Corriz v. Emilio Naranjo
  667 F.2d 892· 10th Cir.· 1981-12-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that defendants' objections regarding potential double recovery were not properly preserved for appeal because they failed to make specific objections to the jury instructions or verdict forms as required by Rule 51.
• Davis v. Vill. Park II Realty Co.
  578 F.2d 461· 2d Cir.· 1978-04-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the alleged chilling effect on First Amendment rights, coupled with potential nominal damages and attorney fees, is sufficient to prevent a civil rights claim from becoming moot, even if injunctive relief is no longer possible.
• Bridgford v. United States
  550 F.2d 978· 4th Cir.· 1977-02-28 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a medical malpractice claim against the government accrues when the claimant discovers, or should have discovered, not only the negligent act but also the resulting harm, and that the suit was not barred by the statute of limitations due to 'blameless ignoranc
• Ruggiero v. Krzeminski
  928 F.2d 558· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the 'plain view' doctrine does not validate warrantless searches, and the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or in awarding nominal damages and attorney's fees.
• United States Football League v. Nat'l Football League
  842 F.2d 1335· 2d Cir.· 1988-03-10 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the jury's findings were supported by the evidence and that the USFL's claims of antitrust violations and predatory conduct by the NFL were not substantiated.
• Piver v. Pender Cnty. Bd. OF Educ.
  835 F.2d 1076· 4th Cir.· 1987-12-22 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the teacher's speech regarding the principal's tenure was a matter of public concern, thus constitutionally protected under the First Amendment. The court also found the record insufficient to determine if the teacher had compromised his claim by signing a sta
• Graham v. Baughman
  772 F.2d 441· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-06 ·cited 28×
  The court held that denying an inmate's request to call witnesses in a disciplinary hearing, without attempting to interview them even after the immediate crisis passed, violated procedural due process, but the inmate failed to prove actual damages from this violation.
• Villanueva v. George
  659 F.2d 851· 8th Cir.· 1981-09-16 ·cited 28×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to create jury issues regarding whether pretrial detainee Villanueva's conditions of confinement were punitive, and that actual damages were not required to vindicate certain constitutional rights.
• Hall v. W. Union Tel. Co.
  59 Fla. 275· Fla.· 1910-01-01 ·cited 28×
  Hall sued Western Union Telegraph Company for improperly transmitting prepaid messages as collect messages, allegedly causing him to lose business opportunities with commission houses. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a judgment limiting recovery to the prepaid charges and inte
• Keister v. Bell
  29 F.4th 1239· 11th Cir.· 2022-03-25 ·cited 27×
  Evangelical preacher Rodney Keister challenged the University of Alabama's policy requiring him to obtain a permit to speak on a sidewalk at the intersection of University Boulevard and Hackberry Lane, arguing the sidewalk was a traditional public forum protected by the First Ame
• Mnemonics, Inc. v. MAX Davis Assocs., Inc.
  808 So. 2d 1278· Fla. 5th DCA· 2002-03-08 ·cited 27×
  The court held that competent, substantial evidence supported the plaintiff's claim for damages resulting from the defendant's breach of contract, entitling the plaintiff to compensatory damages.
• Felicisimo N. Martin v. Gentile
  849 F.2d 863· 4th Cir.· 1988-06-17 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the use of a loaded shotgun through a car windshield, causing fear, constituted an unreasonable use of force violating the Fourth Amendment, entitling the victim to damages.
• Mann v. Smith
  796 F.2d 79· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-04 ·cited 27×
  A jail's blanket ban on newspapers and magazines is an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment because it is an exaggerated response to legitimate penological objectives. However, a pretrial detainee's denial of access to a law library did not violate his constitutional