Solidary Liability

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

• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Murray
  853 F.2d 1251· 5th Cir.· 1988-09-06 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the D'Oench, Duhme doctrine and federal common law preclude makers of promissory notes from asserting defenses, including fraudulent alteration, against the FSLIC when it acquires the notes in a purchase and assumption transaction.
• Baggett v. Richardson
  473 F.2d 863· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-13 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove the unions were liable under respondeat superior and that the damages awarded were adequate under Louisiana tort law.
• McLEMORE v. Landry
  898 F.2d 996· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the notice of appeal only conferred jurisdiction over the partnership, not the individual partners, and affirmed the summary judgment for FSLIC based on the D'Oench doctrine, rejecting the partnership's defenses.
• Auster OIL & GAS, Inc. v. Matilda Gray Stream
  835 F.2d 597· 5th Cir.· 1988-01-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that Mrs. Stream was not liable, but Carmouche, Spook Stream, and M.G.S. were liable for the Fourth Amendment violation. A new trial is required for actual and punitive damages due to instructional error and excessive awards indicating passion and prejudice.
• Diggs v. Hood
  772 F.2d 190· 5th Cir.· 1985-10-04 ·cited 15×
  Under Louisiana's comparative negligence law, a joint tortfeasor who settles with the plaintiff and receives a release, but reserves claims against a non-settling tortfeasor, has no cause of action for contribution, indemnity, subrogation, or unjust enrichment against the non-set
• Neola N. Howard v. Fortenberry
  723 F.2d 1206· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-02 ·cited 14×
  Summary judgment for most defendants is affirmed, but reversed and remanded for the Director of Corrections and the sanitarians due to disputed material facts regarding their duties and potential breaches.
• Equilease Corp. v. Smith Int'l, Inc.
  588 F.2d 919· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that even if Louisiana law recognizes negligent ignorance as a basis for liability, it does not apply in this case because Drilco lacked the means to discover the fraud despite suspicious circumstances.
• Carter v. Epsco, Inc.
  681 F.2d 1062· 5th Cir.· 1982-08-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing cross-claims for indemnification based solely on jury findings of no negligence, as liability could arise from strict liability statutes.
• Manale v. City OF NEW Orleans
  673 F.2d 122· 5th Cir.· 1982-04-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the City was vicariously liable for a police sergeant's defamatory remarks made within the scope of his employment, and that the damages awarded were not inadequate.
• Emp'rs Mut. Liab. Ins. Co. OF Wis. v. Sears
  621 F.2d 746· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-16 ·cited 9×
  An insurer waives its right to seek contribution or indemnity from an insured tortfeasor if it voluntarily settles a claim with knowledge of facts indicating noncoverage, without reserving its rights or obtaining a nonwaiver agreement.
• Reed v. Shell Offshore Inc.
  872 F.2d 680· 5th Cir.· 1989-05-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Louisiana Civil Code Art. 2324, enacted after Olsen, requires apportionment of fault to third parties, including those performing work on the platform, in cases involving custodial liability under Art. 2317.
• Martin v. Am. Petrofina, Inc.
  785 F.2d 543· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a settling joint tortfeasor's share for purposes of contribution is computed based on proportionate fault, not a pro rata basis, when the tort arises from events occurring after the introduction of comparative negligence in Louisiana.
• Star Towing Co., Inc. v. Harvester Supply Co., Inc.
  421 F.2d 628· 5th Cir.· 1970-02-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous and that the defendants were liable as members of a joint venture under Louisiana law.
• Tinsley v. Packard Truck Lines, Inc.
  846 F.2d 334· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 2×
  A release discharging parties not specifically named therein is invalid under both Texas and Louisiana law, particularly when specific parties are typed onto a general release form.
• The Bank OF NEW Orleans & Tr. Co. v. Monco Agency, Inc.
  823 F.2d 888· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-11 ·cited 2×
  Litigation against defendants timely sued for the same loss interrupts prescription as to other defendants alleged to be liable in solido, even if claims arise from different sources of law.
• Am. Cyanamid Co. v. Elec. Indus., Inc.
  630 F.2d 1123· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's participation in a fraudulent scheme to overcharge the plaintiff warranted liability and that the award of damages and legal interest was proper.
• Timothy S. and Leslie Threlkeld v. The Haskins LAW Firm
  922 F.2d 265· 5th Cir.· 1991-01-30
  The court held that attorneys sued for legal malpractice cannot claim indemnity or contribution from the original tortfeasors because they are not liable for the same thing.
• Godfrey Jasmin v. Walton J. Dumas
  781 F.2d 1161· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-06
  The court held that an umbrella policy's per-occurrence limit applies to uninsured motorist coverage, preventing stacking of coverage for multiple vehicles under a single occurrence.
• Intercontinental Engineering-Manufacturing Corp. v. C. F. Bean Corp.
  647 F.2d 621· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-12
  The court held that the escrow agreement created a principal-agent relationship, making Bean liable for Robinson's breach of the sales contract with Intercon.