Voidable Contract

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

• Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores
  W.D. Pa.· 1975-06-09 ·cited 419×
  The Court held that the term 'purchase or sale' in § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 does not include an 'offer to sell'.
• Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Thompson
  93 Fla. 30· Fla.· 1927-01-18 ·cited 103×
  Florida East Coast Railway Company appeals a judgment awarding damages to an injured railway employee, James Thompson, who alleged that a release signed by him was procured through fraud. The Supreme Court of Florida reversed the judgment, holding that Thompson's evidence of frau
• Royal AIR Props., Inc. v. Smith
  312 F.2d 210· 9th Cir.· 1962-12-20 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the affirmative defenses of estoppel, waiver, and laches are available in civil actions brought under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
• VIC Potamkin Chevrolet, Inc. v. Bloom
  386 So. 2d 286· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-07-15 ·cited 87×
  Vic Potamkin Chevrolet and its agents appealed an order denying their motion to compel arbitration of a fraud and deceit claim arising from a vehicle purchase. The court held that the broad arbitration clause in the purchase agreement encompassed the fraud claim and that the part
• Orlando Orange Groves Co. v. Hale
  107 Fla. 304· Fla.· 1932-11-25 ·cited 81×
  Minority stockholders of Orlando Orange Groves Company sought an injunction against the corporation and its managers for alleged mismanagement, improper fund withdrawals, and asset depletion. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's grant of a temporary injunction, ho
• The Greater Iowa Corp. v. McLENDON
  378 F.2d 783· 8th Cir.· 1967-05-19 ·cited 77×
  The court held that plaintiffs, as neither purchasers nor sellers of the securities in question, lacked standing to bring claims under Sections 5(a), 17(a), and 10(b) of the Securities Acts, and also lacked standing to assert violations of Section 7 of the Investment Company Act
• Ricketts v. Pa. R. Co.
  153 F.2d 757· 2d Cir.· 1946-01-10 ·cited 68×
  A release signed by an employee is invalid if procured by an agent's misrepresentation of its contents, even if the employee did not read it, provided the agent's authority was limited.
• Perper v. Edell
  160 Fla. 477· Fla.· 1948-05-14 ·cited 58×
  A real estate broker sought a $25,000 commission for procuring ready, willing, and able purchasers for the Grossinger Hotel. The defendants claimed the broker's listing agent was insane when the contract was formed. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the jury verdict for defendan
• Lummus Co. v. Commonwealth OIL Ref. Co., Inc.
  280 F.2d 915· 1st Cir.· 1960-06-16 ·cited 52×
  The court held that it would not consider new evidence on rehearing and denied the petition for rehearing, clarifying its prior decision regarding the scope of arbitration and the stay of proceedings.
• Mesa Verde Constr. Co. v. N. Cal. Dist. Council OF Laborers
  861 F.2d 1124· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-15 ·cited 49×
  The Supreme Court's interpretation of a statute under Chevron's first step is conclusive and authoritative, binding lower courts.
• Coe v. Muller
  74 Fla. 399· Fla.· 1917-11-28 ·cited 49×
  Henry L. Coe appeals the dismissal of his usury defense in a mortgage foreclosure action, arguing that the 1909 Usury Act replaced the 1891 Act and changed the legal standard from strict liability for any usurious interest to liability only for willful violations. The Florida Sup
• Dionisio v. Dacanay and Reynaldo C. Dacanay
  573 F.2d 1075· 9th Cir.· 1978-02-21 ·cited 40×
  A guardian ad litem may repudiate a settlement agreement on behalf of a minor prior to court approval, as such agreements are voidable until judicially sanctioned.
• Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. OF Pa. v. Carib Aviation, Inc.
  759 F.2d 873· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-07 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the insurance policy's exclusion for loss due to conversion by a person in possession under a lease was unambiguous and applied to the facts, thus denying coverage.
• Occidental Life Ins. Co. of N.C. v. PAT Ryan & Assocs., Inc.
  496 F.2d 1255· 4th Cir.· 1974-05-08 ·cited 38×
  The sale of stock in a corporation, even if it represents a sale of business assets, constitutes a 'security' transaction subject to federal securities laws, and Section 29(b) of the Securities Exchange Act renders contracts voidable, not void, at the option of the innocent party
• The First Nat'l Bank OF Cincinnati v. Pepper
  454 F.2d 626· 2d Cir.· 1972-01-03 ·cited 38×
  The court agreed to reverse the summary judgment due to disputed issues of fact regarding duress.
• Gallon v. The Lloyd-Thomas Co.
  264 F.2d 821· 8th Cir.· 1959-03-25 ·cited 37×
  A contract entered into under duress is voidable and can be ratified by the party's subsequent conduct, such as accepting benefits or failing to object after the duress is removed. The trial court properly entered judgment notwithstanding the verdict because the plaintiff ratifie
• Ormsby v. Ginolfi
  107 So. 2d 272· Fla. 3d DCA· 1958-11-25 ·cited 32×
  A release may be voidable if executed under a genuine mistake of fact regarding personal injuries, and the consideration for the release did not include compensation for such injuries.
• Cardegna v. Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc.
  894 So. 2d 860· Fla.· 2005-01-20 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that when a party alleges a contract is void under Florida law (here, for usury), a trial court—not an arbitrator—must first determine the contract's legality before any arbitration clause can be enforced. The court quashed the Fourth District's dec
• Mattair v. Chas. P. Card
  18 Fla. 761· Fla.· 1882-01-01 ·cited 30×
  This case involves a mortgage foreclosure where married woman Mary Mattair and her husband Charles executed a note and mortgage on her separate property. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the foreclosure decree, holding that a married woman may bind her real estate to secure val
• Chisholm v. House
  183 F.2d 698· 10th Cir.· 1950-07-26 ·cited 28×
  Limitations and laches do not bar claims against a surety when they are unavailable against the principal due to fraud or justifiable ignorance, and a release obtained without consideration from an ignorant beneficiary is not a defense.
• Lainhart v. Burr
  49 Fla. 315· Fla.· 1905-01-01 ·cited 28×
  County commissioners of Dade County sold supplies to the county through firms in which they or their agents were partners, and the county sought to recover the payments. The Florida Supreme Court held that such self-dealing transactions are void as against public policy, but comm
• Thomas v. Edwin C. Ratiner, Franklin B. Glinn & Ratiner & Glinn, P.A.
  462 So. 2d 1157· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-11-20 ·cited 27×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a judgment for a doctor-turned-attorney, finding his retainer contract void due to illegal solicitation. The court held that the doctor, while employed by a hospital, solicited a patient for legal services in violation of a statute, r
• Todd v. JIM McNEFF, Inc.
  667 F.2d 800· 9th Cir.· 1982-02-08 ·cited 27×
  Section 8(f) pre-hire agreements are voidable by the employer until the union attains majority support, but are enforceable until such repudiation.
• Bond v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc.
  246 So. 2d 631· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-04-02 ·cited 25×
  Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of their complaint against Koscot Interplanetary and related defendants, alleging pyramid scheme violations, securities law violations, conspiracy, and breach of a consent decree. The court reversed in part, holding that counts alleging contract
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Levine
  881 F.2d 1165· 2d Cir.· 1989-08-02 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the IRS is entitled to priority for tax liabilities assessed against Levine for which a lien attached to his property before June 19, 1986, but not for later assessments or for assessments against Wilkis. The court also held that the disgorged assets were not
• Kan. City Power & Light Co. v. Burlington N. R.R. Co.
  707 F.2d 1002· 8th Cir.· 1983-06-03 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a contract for coal shipment existed between KCPL and BN, but it was unenforceable due to non-compliance with the Statute of Frauds because the duration was not sufficiently specified.
• In re Naftalin & Co., Inc. v. Merrill Lynch
  469 F.2d 1166· 8th Cir.· 1972-11-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that while initial sales contracts were valid, broker-dealers have a continuing obligation under Regulation T to ensure bona fide cash transactions and promptly liquidate when good faith belief in delivery fails. The seven-day rule for purchases does not dictate pr
• Sci. Holding Co., Ltd. v. Plessey Inc.
  510 F.2d 15· 2d Cir.· 1974-12-20 ·cited 23×
  The court held that Scientific Holding Company was estopped from challenging the validity of the contract amendment due to its unreasonable delay in repudiating it, even if the amendment was initially unauthorized or procured by duress.
• NEW England Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Null
  554 F.2d 896· 8th Cir.· 1977-05-11 ·cited 22×
  The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding the insured's intent in procuring the life insurance policy, and a criminal conviction cannot be used to establish facts in a civil action against a non-party.
• Reg'l Props., Inc. v. Fin. & Real Est. Consulting Co.
  678 F.2d 552· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-03 ·cited 21×
  The court held that developers, as parties to contracts whose performance violated the Securities Exchange Act, were entitled to rescind those agreements under Section 29(b), but remanded for the lower court to rule on the broker's equitable defenses.
• Robinson v. Bruner
  94 Fla. 797· Fla.· 1927-10-27 ·cited 21×
  Robinson & Samuel sought specific performance of a real estate contract against the Bruners for homestead property. The court held that a notary public cannot amend a defective acknowledgment certificate after delivery and acceptance of the contract by the parties without a re-ac
• Straley v. Universal Uranium & Milling Corp.
  289 F.2d 370· 9th Cir.· 1961-04-19 ·cited 20×
  The equitable defense of laches is not available against a claim for money damages under Section 12(1) of the Securities Act of 1933, as the remedy sought is legal in nature. However, other defenses like waiver and estoppel may apply.
• Jack Mann Chevrolet Co. v. Assocs. Inv. Co.
  125 F.2d 778· 6th Cir.· 1942-02-11 ·cited 20×
  A settlement agreement procured by fraud is voidable, not void, and requires affirmative action to rescind; without rescission, it serves as a valid defense to claims arising from the original transaction.
• Three Valleys Mun. Water Dist. v. E.F. Hutton & Co., Inc.
  925 F.2d 1136· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-05 ·cited 19×
  Disputes concerning the "making" of a contract, including whether a contract was formed at all, are to be decided by an arbitrator, not a district court, unless the arbitration clause itself is specifically challenged.
• Roberto v. Aguon
  519 F.2d 754· 9th Cir.· 1975-07-08 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in dismissing the action to set aside a deed, as the plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the deed was void or voidable due to incompetency.
• Florida Evergreen Foliage v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.
  336 F. Supp. 2d 1239· S.D. Fla.· 2004-07-26 ·cited 18×
  The court denied motions to amend, granted summary judgment for DuPont on fraud claims, denied summary judgment for DuPont on breach of settlement claims, and granted motions to dismiss, closing the cases.
• In re Westec Corp. v. Orville S. Carpenter for Westec Corp.
  434 F.2d 195· 5th Cir.· 1970-10-20 ·cited 18×
• Friedman v. Decatur Corp.
  135 F.2d 812· D.C. Cir.· 1943-04-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the contract was bilateral, and the buyer's anticipatory breach excused the seller's failure to fully perform conditions precedent, allowing recovery.
• Burton v. McMillan
  52 Fla. 469· Fla.· 1906-06-01 ·cited 17×
  Beverly H. Burton and his wife Mary A. Burton sued to recover real and personal property they conveyed to A. M. McMillan, a county clerk, in exchange for his promise not to prosecute Beverly for alleged embezzlement. The Florida Supreme Court held that Mary's deed was obtained by
• The United States v. Amdahl Corp.
  786 F.2d 387· Fed. Cir.· 1986-03-06 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the GSBCA erred in ruling that 40 U.S.C. § 759(h)(6)(B) did not apply, as the statute creates a presumption of validity for goods delivered and accepted before procurement authority revocation. The court vacated the portion of the decision regarding the effect
• Bankers Tr. Co. v. Litton Sys., Inc.
  599 F.2d 488· 2d Cir.· 1979-05-14 ·cited 16×
  A holder in due course may enforce a contract induced by commercial bribery, even if the bribery would be a defense against the original party.
• Goldman v. Bank OF the Commonwealth
  467 F.2d 439· 6th Cir.· 1972-09-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a borrower who knowingly engages in transactions violating Regulation U cannot recover damages for those violations, even if the bank also failed to follow proper procedures.
• Haberman v. The Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States
  224 F.2d 401· 5th Cir.· 1955-06-30 ·cited 16×
  An annuity issued by a regulated insurance company is not a 'security' under the Texas Securities Act, and a foreign corporation's failure to comply with a general business registration statute does not entitle a party to restitution after substantial performance or tender of per
• White v. Union Producing Co.
  140 F.2d 176· 5th Cir.· 1944-01-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that under Mississippi law, gross negligence in failing to read a document does not preclude a claim of fraud if the execution was fraudulently induced. The court also held that parol evidence is admissible to prove consideration beyond the recited amount in a deed
• Beazer Homes Corp. v. Bailey
  940 So. 2d 453· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-09-08 ·cited 15×
  Beazer Homes and its sales representatives appealed the denial of their motion to compel arbitration of fraud and FDUTPA claims brought by home buyers alleging misrepresentations about golf course views. The court reversed, holding that fraud in the inducement claims and statutor
• Pitts v. Am. Sec. Life Ins. Co.
  931 F.2d 351· 5th Cir.· 1991-05-21 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the insurance policy was voidable, not void ab initio, and that the insurer waived its right to deny liability by accepting premiums after learning of the policy breaches, entitling the insured to benefits.
• Brisacher v. Tracy-Collins Tr. Co.
  277 F.2d 519· 10th Cir.· 1960-03-30 ·cited 15×
  The court held that a trust executed by a settlor who was under a guardianship but had been restored to capacity, and where the guardian consented, is valid. It also held that attorney fees for other beneficiaries are not chargeable against the challenging beneficiary's interest.
• McCLISH v. LEE
  633 So. 2d 56· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-02-11 ·cited 14×
  This case concerns whether a former wife can collect child support arrearages after agreeing to waive them in exchange for the husband relinquishing visitation rights. The court held that while parties cannot contract away a child's right to support, they can contract as between
• Ismert & Assocs., Inc. v. NEW England Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  801 F.2d 536· 1st Cir.· 1986-09-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that Ismert's promise to execute a release, made as consideration for other agreements, is specifically enforceable, and affirmed summary judgment for NEL.
• CBS, Inc. v. Merrick
  716 F.2d 1292· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-27 ·cited 14×
  An award of restitution in a breach of contract action, used as a substitute for speculative lost profits, should not preclude the recovery of additional measures of damages under New York law.