Reasonable Certainty

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

• W. Terminal Co. v. United States
  412 F.2d 826· 9th Cir.· 1969-05-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's use of hindsight evidence to determine the useful life of a taxpayer's fuel storage facility was erroneous.
• Lieberthal v. Glens Falls Indem. Co.
  174 F.2d 638· 7th Cir.· 1949-05-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury's award for loss of earnings and medical expenses was supported by sufficient evidence and that the medical testimony was competent to establish causation.
• B & B Tree Serv., Inc. v. Tampa Crane & Body, Inc.
  111 So. 3d 976· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-05-01 ·cited 3×
  B & B Tree Service appeals a breach of contract judgment against Tampa Crane for failing to timely install a hookloader system on B & B's truck, arguing the trial court erred in denying loss-of-use damages. The appellate court affirms, finding that while the trial court misapplie
• DeBIASI v. S & S Builders, Inc.
  593 So. 2d 314· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-02-05 ·cited 3×
  Victor DeBiasi appeals a judgment foreclosing a mechanic's lien filed by S & S Builders, Inc., challenging the trial court's findings on contract breach, defective workmanship, and attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, holding that the trial court's factual
• Miller v. Janay Conney
  413 So. 3d 306· Fla. 1st DCA· 2025-06-18 ·cited 2×
  The trial court abused its discretion by admitting the RFA cost estimate and Dr. Saatman's corresponding testimony regarding future medical expenses because the estimate was new evidence disclosed mid-trial after discovery had closed, constituting surprise and trial by ambush und
• IBP, Inc. v. Hady Enters., Inc.
  267 F. Supp. 2d 1148· N.D. Fla.· 2002-02-26 ·cited 2×
  IBP, the world's largest beef producer, sued Hady Enterprises, a meat trading company, after Hady purchased beef livers labeled for Russia, relabeled and repackaged them with Arabic labels and IBP's logo to falsely represent them as Halal-compliant with Egyptian Decree 465, and e
• Stephenson-Noland v. Nadd
  670 So. 2d 1197· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-04-04 ·cited 2×
  A jury instruction erroneously required a finding of permanent injury to award future economic damages; such damages may be awarded if established with reasonable certainty.
• Fiberlok, Inc. v. LMS Enters., Inc.
  976 F.2d 958· 5th Cir.· 1992-11-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in calculating lost profits for an established business and properly applied the UCC § 2.708(b) measure of damages when the buyer's breach caused the seller's inability to mitigate.
• Wood v. DAY
  859 F.2d 1490· D.C. Cir.· 1988-10-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury instructions allowing recovery for future medical expenses and lost future earnings were erroneous because they were not supported by substantial evidence after testimony regarding potential surgery was excluded.
• Compressed GAS Corp., Inc. v. United States Steel Corp. & Jack B. Kelley, Inc.
  857 F.2d 346· 6th Cir.· 1988-09-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury was improperly allowed to find against defendants on fraudulent misrepresentation and lost profits, and that the damages award must be vacated.
• Baker v. The Kroger Co.
  784 F.2d 1172· 4th Cir.· 1986-02-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that expert testimony regarding the plaintiff's future lost earning capacity was too speculative and should not have been presented to the jury, requiring reversal of the damages award.
• Karl Raypole (84-3041) v. Chemi-Trol Chem. Co., Inc.
  754 F.2d 169· 6th Cir.· 1985-02-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act does not require annual cash contributions to the company's profit sharing plan for returning veterans because the plan is primarily short-term compensation for work performed and the veterans' rights to co
• CTI Int'l, Inc. v. Lloyds Underwriters & British Cos.
  735 F.2d 679· 2d Cir.· 1984-05-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that CTI failed to prove lost rental income or loss of use damages under New York law, as evidence showed no actual financial loss occurred.
• Walgreen Ariz. Drug Co. v. Levitt
  670 F.2d 860· 9th Cir.· 1982-03-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in precluding the Levitts from presenting affirmative defenses to liability, as the prior appellate decision only addressed the validity of Walgreen's lease, not all potential defenses. The court also found that the district court erre
• United States v. Gayne Frederic Sayer
  579 F.2d 1169· 9th Cir.· 1978-08-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the search conducted in Los Angeles was a valid border search, affirming the conviction.
• GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. v. Dixon
  209 So. 3d 77· Fla. 3d DCA· 2017-01-04 ·cited 1×
  GEICO appeals a trial court's denial of its motion for new trial on compensatory damages in an uninsured motorist case. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that evidence of the uninsured motorist driver's intoxication was irrelevant and highly prejudicial dur
• Truelove v. Blount
  954 So. 2d 1284· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-05-09 ·cited 1×
  In this personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle accident, the appellate court affirmed the jury's award of damages for property damage to Mr. Blount's front-end loader but reversed and remanded the award of $220,000 in future damages for medical expenses and lost earn
• Dictiomatic, Inc. v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co.
  127 F. Supp. 2d 1239· S.D. Fla.· 1999-06-15 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were frivolous and untenable, warranting attorney's fees and costs against the plaintiff and their counsel under Florida Statute § 57.105 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927.
• Dictiomatic, Inc. v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co.
  958 F. Supp. 594· S.D. Fla.· 1997-01-21 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove its business interruption claim because the alleged losses were not caused by the hurricane but by pre-existing market conditions and the speculative nature of its business projections.
• Trademark Research Corp. v. Maxwell Online, Inc.
  995 F.2d 326· 2d Cir.· 1993-05-18 ·cited 1×
  The court held that lost profits damages for in-house searches were not proven with sufficient certainty or contemplated by the parties, and reversed that award. However, the court affirmed the award for wasted expenses, finding the evidence sufficient.
• Bassett v. Morine
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2026-05-29
  A trial court does not abuse its discretion in granting remittitur when a jury's damages award for future medical expenses is not supported by evidence presented at trial with reasonable certainty, even if a document in the record could theoretically support a higher figure if in
• Ameristar Air Cargo, Inc. v. Triad Aero Sales
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-08-14
  The court denied the defendant's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law and motion for a new trial, finding the jury's verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and within the permissible range of damages.
• Del. in & for New Castle Cnty. Lisa Sinclair v. C.A. No: CPU4-23-001732 CMI Solar & Elec., Inc.
  Del. C.P.· 2024-10-31
  The Court entered judgment in favor of Lisa Sinclair, awarding her one dollar in nominal damages. While Ms. Sinclair proved a material breach of contract and breach of implied warranty of good quality and workmanship, she failed to prove compensatory damages to a reasonable certa
• Eran Fin. Servs., LLC v. Eran Indus. Ltd.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-10-02
  The court granted in part and denied in part various motions in limine, precluding certain evidence and arguments from trial, particularly concerning damages, undisclosed intellectual property, and partnership theories.
• Murphy v. Airway Air Charter, Inc
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-09-30
  The court granted in part and denied in part the parties' motions in limine, ruling on the admissibility of various categories of evidence and testimony for the upcoming trial.
• Cedant v. United States
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-08-30
  The court held that the United States Postal Service driver's negligence caused the plaintiff's permanent injuries, and the plaintiff is entitled to damages for those injuries, including pain and suffering.
• Feenix Payment Sys., LLC v. C.A. No. N21c-05-099 EMD Ccld Michael Blum
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2024-05-29
  The court found that Michael Blum breached the Separation Agreement by making disparaging statements about Feenix and its affiliates in a letter sent to Atalaya, and by disclosing confidential information about a new financing arrangement. However, Feenix largely failed to prove
• Cardinal Point, LLC v. Edgewood P'rs Ins. Ctr., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-04-16
  Cardinal Point, LLC and its members sold their healthcare reinsurance distribution business to EPIC Holdings in 2019 under an Asset Purchase Agreement with an earnout structure, but the business significantly underperformed projections and EPIC stopped operations and terminated t
• OU v. Click Labs, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-29
  The court held that a startup company cannot recover consequential damages for lost profits or lost investments based on speculative business plans and unconfirmed investor interest, and that genuine disputes of material fact preclude summary judgment on the breach of contract cl
• Cardinal Point, LLC v. Edgewood P'rs Ins. Ctr., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-12-11
  Cardinal Point, LLC and its members sold their healthcare reinsurance business to EPIC through an Asset Purchase Agreement that tied the purchase price to future performance over four years, with the members also entering into employment agreements with EPIC. The members sued EPI
• Sofregen Med. Inc. v. Allergan Sales, LLC
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2023-06-08
  The Delaware Superior Court found that Allergan breached the Asset Purchase Agreement (APA) by failing to account for and turn over 131 units of SERI trunk stock, awarding Sofregen $393,000 in damages. The court also found in favor of Sofregen on Allergan's counterclaim for breac
• Davis v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-08-15
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to support his claims for lost profits and medical diagnoses, entitling the government to partial summary judgment.
• Kuhl
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-03-29
  The court held that there are sufficient facts to present the issue of lost charter income to a jury, denying the motions for summary judgment.
• N. Palm Motors, LLC v. Gen. Motors LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-02-03
  The court granted GM's motion for partial summary judgment on Napleton's claim for lost profit damages, finding the claim too speculative under Florida law.
• PB Legacy, Inc. v. Am. Mariculture, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-10-26
  The court denied the defendants' motion in limine to exclude evidence of speculative damages, finding the issue premature for determination before trial.
• State Farm v. Harmon
  Fla. 5th DCA· 2018-01-22
  The trial court erred in denying State Farm's motion for remittitur or new trial regarding the $100,000 future medical expenses award because there was insufficient evidence of specific future treatments or costs beyond routine follow-up visits. Recovery of future medical expense
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. Camal Terry v. Robin Drive Auto
  Del. C.P.· 2016-12-07
  The Court held that the contract was void ab initio due to material ambiguities in its terms, specifically regarding the duration of the layaway and the application of payments. Consequently, the Court found that the defendant was unjustly enriched by the payments received from t
• Siga Techs., Inc.
  Del.· 2015-12-23
  The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Chancery's award of $113 million in expectation damages to PharmAthene, Inc. The Court held that the law of the case doctrine did not prevent the Court of Chancery from reconsidering its prior ruling that expectation damages were t
• Perez v. State
  120 So. 3d 168· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-08-23
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to prove the defendant committed arson, as it only raised suspicion of guilt rather than a reasonable certainty.
• IN & FOR Sussex Cnty. Kevin A. Evans
  Del. C.P.· 2011-07-29
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment in favor of the plaintiff, holding that the plaintiff was the lawful owner and entitled to possession of the irrigation equipment. The court found that the defendants failed to prove their defenses, including an agreement to
• Pharmathene, Inc.
  Del. Ch.· 2010-11-23
  The Court denied SIGA's motion for partial summary judgment, finding that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the parties entered into a binding licensing agreement. The Court also found it premature to grant summary judgment on the issue of expectation damage
• Premier Atms, Inc. v. Daisy Fresh, Inc.
  23 So. 3d 1282· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-01-06
  Florida appellate court reversed trial court's judgment and reinstated jury verdict for Premier ATMs, holding that Premier established lost profits with reasonable certainty based on established data rather than speculation.
• In & for Kent Cnty. Velocity Express, Inc.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2009-08-07
  The court granted in part and denied in part Office Depot's motion for summary judgment. The court denied the motion regarding Velocity's claim for amounts owed under the CD&L contract, finding a genuine issue of material fact. The court granted the motion regarding Office Depot'
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. William J. LaPOINT & John M. Nehra
  Del. Ch.· 2007-09-04
  The Court held that while AmerisourceBergen Corporation (ABC) breached its contractual duties to actively and exclusively promote Bridge Medical, Inc. (Bridge) products, the plaintiffs failed to prove that these breaches caused Bridge to miss its earnout targets with reasonable c
• Qantum Commc'ns Corp. v. Star Broad., Inc.
  491 F. Supp. 2d 1123· S.D. Fla.· 2007-06-08
  The court held that the plaintiff is entitled to damages for lost profits, tower purchase option, missing assets, and attorney's fees and costs due to the defendant's breach of contract and sanctionable conduct.
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Amaysing Techs. Corp. v. Civil Action No. 19890 Cyberair Commc'ns, Inc.
  Del. Ch.· 2004-05-28
  The Court of Chancery has jurisdiction over a breach of contract claim seeking specific performance when the plaintiff demonstrates that there is no adequate remedy at law due to the unique nature of the contract and the speculative nature of calculating damages. Summary judgment
• In & for New Castle Cnty.
  Del. Ch.· 2002-04-10
  The court held that Advanta breached the Contribution Agreement by failing to disclose known facts about a significant miscoding problem, which rendered the Closing Balance Sheet inaccurate. The court also found Advanta liable for negligent misrepresentation. Advanta's defenses,
• Sharick v. Se. Univ. OF THE Health Scis., Inc.
  780 So. 2d 142· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-04-04
• Smith v. Buzzelli
  705 So. 2d 981· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-01-28
  The court held that an award of future medical expenses was not supported by sufficient evidence presented at trial.
• Gilliam v. Roche Biomedical Labs., Inc.
  989 F.2d 278· 8th Cir.· 1993-03-25
  The court held that expert testimony regarding the theoretical possibility of future harm is admissible to show the reasonableness of a plaintiff's fear, and that a jury instruction on future mental anguish is permissible even without proof of an increased risk of disease, provid