1,242 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 85 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-08-09
The court held that citing federal navigation rules in a state law negligence claim does not create federal question jurisdiction sufficient for removal.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-07-11
A federal court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over a removed state-court eviction case where the removal is based on the plaintiff's counterclaims or defenses, and abstention is appropriate if the case were treated as originally filed in federal court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-06-30
The court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss was moot due to an amended complaint and that the plaintiff failed to adequately allege diversity jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-06-30
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction, but granted leave to amend due to potential differences from prior actions. The motion to disqualify the magistrate judge was denied.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-31
The Court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's amended complaint and therefore dismissed the action without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-31
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case and therefore dismissed the action.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-27
The court held that when a plaintiff amends their complaint to remove all federal claims, the federal court loses subject matter jurisdiction and must remand the case to state court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-23
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to adequately allege the citizenship of the parties, thus not establishing diversity jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-13
The court denied Costco's motion for leave to file a third-party complaint because it failed to establish a basis for federal jurisdiction over the proposed third-party defendant.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-10
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's action and dismissed the case without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-25
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's pro se filing and dismissed the action without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-21
The court held that the plaintiff's third amended complaint must be dismissed with prejudice for failing to adequately allege jurisdiction, constituting an impermissible shotgun pleading, and violating local formatting rules.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-04-14
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed because it failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction and did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-04-12
The court held that the amended complaint must be dismissed for failure to establish subject-matter jurisdiction and for failing to meet pleading standards under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 9(b).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-03-31
An attorney representing a medical provider sued an opposing counsel and their law firm, claiming they violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by filing a state court action based on a doctor's lien to collect alleged unpaid medical bills. The court granted summar
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-03-29
The court held that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) does not completely preempt state law claims, and therefore, removal based on federal question jurisdiction was improper when the complaint only alleged state law claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-03-09
The court held that the remainder beneficiaries should be realigned as plaintiffs because the primary purpose of the lawsuit aligns their interests with the plaintiff, thus establishing diversity jurisdiction and denying the motion to remand.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-01-31
The court held that the complaint failed to establish federal question jurisdiction or diversity jurisdiction, and thus dismissed all counts.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-01-26
The court held that the pro se plaintiffs' complaint must be dismissed without prejudice for failing to adequately allege subject-matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-12-16
A plaintiff's deliberate failure to disclose the amount in controversy to prevent removal constitutes bad faith, allowing removal beyond the one-year statutory limit.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-12-14
The court held that the defendant met its burden to show the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus denying the plaintiff's motion to remand.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-11-30
The Court strikes the pro se plaintiff's complaint for failing to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 10, and for failing to establish subject matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-11-24
The court held that the plaintiff's attempt to remove a state foreclosure action to federal court failed due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction and that her federal claims were frivolous as they did not allege state action.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-11-18
The court granted the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis but struck the complaint because it failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-11-04
The court held that it must remand the case because the addition of a non-diverse defendant destroyed subject matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-11-02
The court held that a pro se litigant's application to proceed in forma pauperis must be denied and the case dismissed without prejudice if the complaint fails to state a claim or establish subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-10-15
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was frivolous and dismissed the action with prejudice without leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-09-27
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over claims challenging tax assessments and collections due to sovereign immunity and statutory bars, and that a claim regarding a 'seriously delinquent tax debt' certification failed to state a claim.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-08-09
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was insufficient to establish diversity jurisdiction because it failed to properly allege the citizenship of the parties.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-07-26
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction upon the filing of the Second Amended Complaint because complete diversity was not established.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-07-21
A state-law claim does not arise under federal law for removal purposes unless a federal issue is necessarily raised, actually disputed, substantial, and capable of resolution without disrupting the federal-state balance.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-07-20
The court held that the defendant's allegations regarding the plaintiff's citizenship were insufficient to establish diversity jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-07-17
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff's claims arose under state law and the amount in controversy did not meet the statutory threshold for diversity jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-07-07
A federal court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims when all federal claims have been dismissed, especially when the remaining claims are best suited for a state court.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-07-06
The court held that the defendants' removal of the case was untimely because the plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint provided sufficient information to ascertain removability more than 30 days prior to removal.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-06-30
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction after the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed all federal claims, requiring remand to state court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-05-24
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to establish federal question jurisdiction and the complaint constituted a shotgun pleading.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-05-20
The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal diversity jurisdiction, as the amount in controversy for an ejectment action cannot be determined by monetary value from the defendant's perspective.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-04-29
The court held that the plaintiff's affidavit of indigency and motion for default judgment were insufficient and prematurely filed, and the complaint failed to state a claim or establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-04-28
The Court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim and lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, warranting dismissal without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-16
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was insufficient to establish subject matter jurisdiction because it failed to plausibly allege the amount in controversy.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-11
The court held that the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis should be denied because the amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and failed to establish federal jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-01
The court is not inclined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claim and orders parties to show cause why the case should not be remanded.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-02-25
The court held that removal was improper because it was untimely and sought after final judgment in state court, and the defendant failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-01-13
The court dismissed the case because it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred review of the state court's judgment.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-01-11
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case because the plaintiffs failed to allege any basis for federal jurisdiction and had repeatedly failed to cure such deficiencies in prior filings.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-29
The court held that the complaint must be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and because abstention principles apply.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-22
The district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review claims challenging an alien's removal order or the proceedings leading to it, as these are exclusively vested in the courts of appeals under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-12-22
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to adequately allege diversity jurisdiction because they did not sufficiently plead the citizenship of two defendant limited liability companies.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-10
The district court held it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review the petitioner's challenge to a final order of removal, as such review is exclusively vested in the court of appeals.