Rule 15, Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure

208 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Int'l Bhd. of Boilermakers v. Local Lodge D354
  897 F.2d 1400· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the contractual provisions of the Merger Agreement and the International's Constitution are not ambiguous and require the Local to pay per capita taxes and surrender assets until formal decertification by the NLRB.
• Hall v. Comm'r, Internal Revenue Serv. (Department OF Treasury)
  805 F.2d 1511· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statutory prohibition against appellate review of district court determinations under 26 U.S.C. § 7429 does not bar appeals from dismissals based solely on procedural grounds, and that automatic dismissal for failure to comply with a local rule requiring a
• Condon v. Coyn Richardson
  411 F.2d 489· 7th Cir.· 1969-05-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the complaint stated claims under federal securities law and genuine issues of material fact remained.
• Est. of L. C. Hunt v. United States
  309 F.2d 146· 5th Cir.· 1962-10-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a prior judgment on the merits of an estate tax refund suit bars a subsequent suit on a new ground for refund if that ground was known and could have been raised in the first suit.
• United States v. Classified Parking Sys., Inc.
  213 F.2d 631· 5th Cir.· 1954-06-25 ·cited 6×
• Petsel v. Chicago
  202 F.2d 817· 8th Cir.· 1953-03-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that under the Illinois Civil Practice Act of 1933, a plaintiff should be permitted to amend a wrongful death complaint to add necessary factual allegations, even after the one-year statute of limitations has expired, if the amendment relates to the same transactio
• Stephens v. Reed
  121 F.2d 696· 3d Cir.· 1941-06-30 ·cited 6×
  A property owner, including a national bank, is personally liable to a mortgagee for taxes paid by the mortgagee to avoid foreclosure, regardless of the owner's beneficial interest or the property's income.
• Johnson v. Duval Cnty. Teachers Credit Union
  507 F. Supp. 307· M.D. Fla.· 1980-11-14 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a plaintiff's failure to obtain a right-to-sue letter due to EEOC inaction does not bar a Title VII claim, but vague allegations of continuous discrimination by a former employee are insufficient for a § 1981 claim.
• Wiley v. The Peoples Bank & Tr. Co.
  438 F.2d 513· 5th Cir.· 1971-02-10 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the instruments were documentary drafts, exempting them from the UCC's midnight deadline for payor banks, and that UCC § 3-511(4) does not excuse liability for dishonor of demand items.
• Crown Coat Front Co., Inc. v. United States
  395 F.2d 160· 2d Cir.· 1968-05-14 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to amend the complaint and properly dismissed the complaint as time-barred, as the prior filing in the Court of Claims did not toll the statute of limitations for the district court action.
• McMORAN OIL & GAS Co. v. KN Energy, Inc.
  907 F.2d 1022· 10th Cir.· 1990-07-10 ·cited 4×
  The addition of a nondiverse limited partnership as a party plaintiff, even if it is the real party in interest, destroys diversity jurisdiction, and ancillary jurisdiction cannot save the action.
• Aids Counseling & Testing Ctrs. v. Grp. W Television
  903 F.2d 1000· 4th Cir.· 1990-05-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying leave to amend, granting summary judgment, dismissing individual claims, or quashing subpoenas, and therefore affirmed the judgment.
• Masters v. USX Corp.
  900 F.2d 727· 4th Cir.· 1990-04-09 ·cited 4×
  A plan's revision to a withdrawal liability assessment may only be refused by an arbitrator if the employer demonstrates prejudice, and the use of a moving market average for asset valuation is not per se unreasonable.
• Cannon v. The Kroger Co.
  837 F.2d 660· 4th Cir.· 1988-01-29 ·cited 4×
  The court should not have dismissed the plaintiff's hybrid action for failing to file a federal-style complaint within six months of accrual. The action was timely commenced in state court under North Carolina procedural rules, which were applicable prior to removal. Federal Rule
• Mendoza v. Wight Vineyard Mgmt.
  783 F.2d 941· 9th Cir.· 1986-02-26 ·cited 4×
  Vineyard management companies that operate farms are exempt from the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act's registration requirements as 'agricultural employers,' even if they do not own the land.
• Span-Eng Assocs. v. Weidner
  771 F.2d 464· 10th Cir.· 1985-08-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by issuing an injunction preventing plaintiffs from proceeding in a related Arizona action, as the defendants failed to make a strong showing of necessity for such an injunction.
• McKenzie v. Wakulla Cnty.
  45 F.R.D. 97· N.D. Fla.· 1981-02-27 ·cited 4×
• Stiegele v. J. M. Moore Import-Export Co., Inc.
  312 F.2d 588· 2d Cir.· 1963-01-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the patent was valid and infringed, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend pleadings for late defenses.
• In re Hudson & Manhattan R.R. Co. v. Stichman
  229 F.2d 616· 2d Cir.· 1956-02-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the debtor's petitions to employ an engineering firm to value its property and to withdraw its amended answer and file a new one, as the debtor had previously consented to reorganization and its subsequent attempts to contest
• Moiger v. Johnson
  180 F.2d 777· D.C. Cir.· 1950-03-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the lessee's actions constituted a valid exercise of the lease extension, which carried forward the option to purchase, entitling the lessee to specific performance.
• Calhoun Cnty. v. Roberts
  148 F.2d 901· 5th Cir.· 1945-04-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover a specific, calculated amount of bond funds remaining in the construction account, but not the full amount previously awarded.
• Olivera v. Badcock Econ. Furniture Inc.
  2008 WL 11408621· M.D. Fla.· 2020-01-07 ·cited 3×
  The court granted the plaintiff's unopposed motion to substitute the proper defendant and transfer the case to the Southern District of Florida.
• Aalco Constr. Co. v. F. H. Linneman Constr. Co., Inc.
  399 F.2d 516· 10th Cir.· 1968-09-04 ·cited 3×
  The court held that an oral agreement to indemnify is enforceable under Oklahoma law and is not subject to the Statute of Frauds, and that the trial court's findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence.
• Ferry v. Bekum Am. Corp.
  185 F. Supp. 2d 1285· M.D. Fla.· 2002-02-22 ·cited 2×
  A federal court cannot drop a nondiverse plaintiff over that plaintiff's objection to create or preserve subject matter jurisdiction in a removed case, absent fraudulent joinder.
• James v. McCAW Cellular Commc'ns, Inc.
  988 F.2d 583· 5th Cir.· 1993-04-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment because the appellant's chain of title was defective and the FCC applications were fatally flawed under FCC regulations.
• Bhd. Shipping Co., Ltd. v. ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. & City of Milwaukee
  985 F.2d 323· 7th Cir.· 1993-02-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding the city's negligence.
• In re Roberts Farms Inc. v. Bultman
  980 F.2d 1248· 9th Cir.· 1992-11-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an amended proof of claim was permissible as a clarification and did not prejudice the debtor, and that the law firm's records constituted an open book account, making the claim timely.
• Prudhomme v. Tenneco OIL Co.
  955 F.2d 390· 5th Cir.· 1992-03-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by allowing the plaintiffs to proceed on a strict liability theory after the plaintiffs had withdrawn their motion to amend their complaint to add such a claim, thereby misleading the defendant and causing prejudice.
• Sola v. Lafayette Coll.
  804 F.2d 40· 3d Cir.· 1986-10-28 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed summary judgment on wrongful discharge and most contract claims, but vacated and remanded the affirmative action claim for further consideration.
• Caribbean Ins. Servs., Inc. v. Am. Bankers Life Assurance Co. OF Fla.
  754 F.2d 2· 1st Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a contract for a general agent's appointment in Puerto Rico is void if the agent lacks the required license, and a party cannot belatedly change their legal theory to avoid this consequence.
• Depositors Tr. Co. v. Slobusky
  692 F.2d 205· 1st Cir.· 1982-11-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of a pretrial agreement not raised in the pleadings and did not err in finding the defendant liable on the note despite prior jury instructions that suggested exhaustion of claims against another party was r
• Hemphill v. Melton
  551 F.2d 589· 4th Cir.· 1977-03-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's pro se complaint, liberally interpreted, stated a potential cause of action under Title VII, and thus should not have been dismissed for failure to state a claim.
• Herrin Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jarvis
  156 F.2d 276· 5th Cir.· 1946-06-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in allowing an amendment to the complaint, finding sufficient evidence of negligence, and applying Mississippi's comparative negligence law.
• Kennedy v. AmGUARD Ins. Co.
  2013 WL 12092257· S.D. Fla.· 2025-01-21 ·cited 1×
  The court recommended granting the defendant's motion to amend its affirmative defenses and denying the plaintiff's motion to amend her complaint and remand the case.
• Johnson v. Potter
  732 F. Supp. 2d 1264· M.D. Fla.· 2010-08-10 ·cited 1×
  The court held that a hostile workplace claim fails for lack of pervasive intimidation, but disparate treatment claims regarding discipline and extra hours survive summary judgment, with leave granted to amend the complaint to include omitted factual allegations.
• Pretty Punch Shoppettes, Inc. v. Creative Wonders, Inc.
  750 F. Supp. 487· M.D. Fla.· 1990-10-01 ·cited 1×
  The court denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment on patent infringement, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding claim construction and equivalency. The court also denied the defendant's motion to drop parties and motion to strike.
• WJA Realty Ltd. P'ship v. Nelson
  708 F. Supp. 1268· S.D. Fla.· 1989-03-09 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the INS regulation allowing suspension of H-1 visa holders' work authorizations during a strike is an impermissible assumption of legislative power and invalid as applied to H-1 visa holders.
• Cabral v. City of Fort Myers
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-06
  The court held that the City's noise ordinance was not facially unconstitutional and that the plaintiffs failed to state an as-applied claim under the First Amendment or a selective enforcement claim. The court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state la
• Vicknair v. Hartford Ins. Co. of the Midwest
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-12-31
  The court recommended dismissal of the breach of insurance policy claim without prejudice because the complaint failed to allege facts supporting the plaintiffs' contractual standing as beneficiaries of the policy, despite the defendant's arguments concerning Article III standing
• Moore v. City of Daytona Beach
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-16
  The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the amended complaint without prejudice, but granted leave to amend.
• Jeannine Orange v. Lexus Fin. Servs. & Lexus of Tampa Bay
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-11-21
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and must be stricken.
• Rubin Young v. Hon. Donald J. Trump
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-10-14
  Pro se plaintiffs filed suit against federal and state officials claiming that the federal government violated the Guarantee Clause by failing to recognize Indigenous Americans as sovereign and that the Fourteenth Amendment's birthright citizenship has been improperly extended to
• Consejo Regulador del Tequila A.C. v. S2F Online, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-09-29
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and must be stricken.
• Vidal v. The Hershey Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-19
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to allege facts demonstrating a concrete injury, thus lacking Article III standing to pursue their claims.
• Scott v. Polk Cnty. Sheriff's Off.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-03
  The court recommended dismissal of the complaint for failing to state a claim and violating procedural rules, but granted leave to amend.
• Randall-Mosely v. Citibank
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-02
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and ordered it stricken.
• Matz v. Bond
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-20
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and struck it.
• v. Bator
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-20
  The Court holds that the plaintiff's complaint constitutes an impermissible shotgun pleading and strikes it, giving the plaintiff an opportunity to replead.
• Williams v. Noem
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-16
  The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and struck it.
• Tucker v. The Sch. Bd. of Lee Cnty.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-02
  The court held that the plaintiffs' amended complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading, failing to provide adequate notice of the claims against the defendants, and therefore recommended dismissal.