28 U.S.C. § 1332(A)

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

• Next Ins. US Co. v. Apogee Integrations, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-10-07
  This is a procedural order addressing deficiencies in disclosure statements filed by defendants in a diversity jurisdiction case. The court struck one defendant's disclosure statement for failing to properly identify himself as a legal representative and provide the decedent's ci
• Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. v. Utter
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-27
  The court recommended granting the motion for default judgment against defendants for breach of contract and violations of Florida Statute § 68.065, awarding damages and interest.
• Ortiz v. Target Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-09-11
  The court held that the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction is determined by the face value of the plaintiff's claimed damages, including medical bills before adjustments or collateral source payments, and potential non-economic damages.
• Ambrose v. Progressive Select Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-09
  The court held that an amended complaint asserting a new claim does not constitute the commencement of a new action for removal purposes, and therefore, removal was untimely.
• Flynn v. Thermacell Repellents, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-29
  The court held that the Fire Report did not unequivocally establish federal jurisdiction, making the removal timely.
• Hamilton v. Crete Carrier Corp.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-27
  The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold for diversity jurisdiction.
• Rothschild v. Pfizer Corp.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-12
  The court recommended dismissal of the second amended complaint because it remained deficient in multiple respects, including improper pleading, failure to establish subject-matter jurisdiction, and inclusion of impermissible class action allegations.
• Klarenbeek v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-02
  The court held that the defendant's removal of the case was untimely because the case was removable upon filing, and the defendant had knowledge of the removability requirements at that time.
• Lopez v. Vanderhall Motor Works, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-31
  The court held that a defendant's removal of a case based on diversity jurisdiction is untimely if filed more than one year after the action's commencement, absent plaintiff's bad faith.
• Bulla v. Neal
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-19
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, and therefore, the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
• Vazquez v. Lowe's Home Ctrs., LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-06-17
  The court held that the defendant failed to meet its burden of proving the amount in controversy exceeded the jurisdictional minimum, requiring remand to state court.
• Meke Rest. v. Westchester Surplus Lines Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-05-03
  The court held that the defendant sufficiently established the amount in controversy by a preponderance of the evidence, thus denying the plaintiff's motion to remand.
• U.S. Bank v. Roesch
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-04-30
  The court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss should be denied because the plaintiff sufficiently stated claims for relief and the court had subject-matter jurisdiction.
• White v. GM Law Firm LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-04-29
  The court granted in part and denied in part GM Law's motion in limine, and granted Plaintiffs' motion in limine, ruling on various evidentiary issues for the upcoming trial.
• 4205 Pine Island LLC v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-04-25
  The court held that the amended complaint failed to state a claim for breach of contract or declaratory relief because the plaintiff did not adequately plead facts showing a covered loss under the insurance policy.
• Herezi v. 31-W Insulation Co., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-28
  The court held that the defendant's removal was timely because service of process was defective under Florida law, meaning the 30-day removal clock had not begun to run. However, the court could not determine subject matter jurisdiction due to inadequate allegations of the partie
• Anglin v. ChildNet
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-03-22
  The court denied the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to establish subject-matter jurisdiction and filed a shotgun pleading.
• Waters v. Rockett
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-18
  The court held that removal was improper because the plaintiff's state-law eviction complaint did not present a federal question, and a defendant's counterclaim cannot establish federal question jurisdiction.
• Hyde v. Progressive Am. Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-14
  A defendant does not waive its right to remove a case to federal court by taking actions in state court before the basis for removal, such as complete diversity and sufficient amount in controversy, exists.
• Rogers v. Jackson
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-12
  A federal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a state law paternity and child support action, even if the defendant asserts federal law defenses or counterclaims.
• Donovan v. Quimby
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-12-18
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish domicile in Florida, thus destroying diversity jurisdiction and requiring remand to state court.
• Bell v. Bayside Ambulatory Surgery Ctr.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-12-18
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to allege the citizenship of the parties or the amount in controversy required for diversity jurisdiction.
• R&S at Bayfront Bistro, LLC v. Alliant Ins. Servs., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-12-11
  The court held that the Notice of Removal was insufficient to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction due to inadequate pleading of party citizenship.
• Complete Care Ctrs., LLC v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-12-08
  The court held that removal was improper due to a lack of complete diversity, as a non-diverse party was not fraudulently joined.
• Mazariegos v. Protective Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-12-07
  The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was untimely because it was filed more than 30 days after receiving an email that clearly indicated the case was removable, and therefore granted the motion to remand.
• Dimasi v. USAA Gen. Indem. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-10-18
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
• Anglin v. Brown
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-10-04
  The court held that the case must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the complaint failed to establish federal question or diversity jurisdiction and alleged both parties were citizens of Florida.
• Radzinskaia v. NH Mountain, LP
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-09-29
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead that the defendants acted as unregistered brokers or dealers under the Exchange Act, and thus Count IV is dismissed with prejudice. Remaining state law claims are dismissed without prejudice due to lack of federal quest
• Reiner v. Cintas Corp. No. 2
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-09-22
  The court held that the defendants failed to establish diversity jurisdiction, and therefore the case must be remanded to state court.
• Ramos v. Am. Sec. Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-09-13
  A post-removal settlement offer, unsupported by specific damages information, does not negate the amount in controversy established at the time of removal.
• Colpoys v. Future Motion, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-08-17
  The court held that diversity jurisdiction did not exist because the plaintiff and one of the defendants are citizens of Florida, requiring remand to state court.
• Tah MS Borrower LLC v. Faranzua
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-08-16
  The court held that removal was improper because the plaintiff's state law claim did not present a federal question, and therefore the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
• Bailes v. Westrock Container, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-08-15
  The court held that the defendant failed to meet the heavy burden of proving fraudulent joinder, thus the forum defendant rule applied and the case must be remanded.
• Wallace v. White
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-08-15
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the complaint failed to allege a basis for federal jurisdiction or sufficient facts for diversity jurisdiction.
• Tesorero v. Indep. Specialty Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-08-15
  The court held that a defendant's removal of a case is timely if filed within 30 days of receiving an 'other paper' from which removability can be ascertained, even if the defendant had prior knowledge of facts suggesting removability before the initial pleading was filed.
• Hancock Whitney Bank v. Jackson Nat'l Life Ins. Co.
  N.D. Fla.· 2023-07-29
  The court held that Counts I and II (breach of contract and breach of implied covenant of good faith) state plausible claims, but Count III (wrongful termination) and Count IV (unjust enrichment) are dismissed.
• State Farm Mut. Autombile Ins. Co. v. Semino
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-06-07
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently allege the amount in controversy, thus lacking subject matter jurisdiction.
• Beardsworth v. Burdt
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-06-06
  The court held that the removing defendants failed to establish fraudulent joinder, and thus the presence of the non-diverse defendant destroys diversity jurisdiction, requiring remand.
• Couture v. Noshirvan
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-05-30
  The court held that the complaint must be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to inadequate pleading of diversity.
• Thoene v. Am. Sec. Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-05-26
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish the amount in controversy by a preponderance of the evidence, requiring remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
• PMG-Greybrook Riverfront I, LLC v. D'Amato
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-05-10
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the state law unlawful detainer action did not present a federal question on its face, and diversity jurisdiction was also absent.
• Smith v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-04-28
  The court held that the defendant properly removed the case because complete diversity existed after disregarding the fictitious defendant, and the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
• King v. Germania Select Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-04-28
  The court held that the defendant met its burden to demonstrate that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus denying the plaintiff's motion to remand.
• Prieto v. Cap. Brands, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-03-22
  The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint failed to adequately plead diversity jurisdiction because it did not properly allege the citizenship of the individual plaintiffs or the limited liability company defendants.
• CareerStaff Unlimited, LLC v. Port Charlotte Opco, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-03-10
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to adequately plead diversity of citizenship, requiring dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
• The Dellutri Law Grp., P.A. v. Allied Ins. Co. of Am.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-03-08
  The Court held that the amount in controversy did not exceed the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold, and therefore, the case must be remanded to state court. The Court also denied Plaintiff's request for attorney's fees.
• CareerStaff Unlimited, LLC v. Port Charlotte Opco, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-02-22
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately allege diversity of citizenship, requiring dismissal of the complaint without prejudice.
• Wiens Cap. Mgmt., LLC v. Advocate Consulting Legal Grp., PLLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-02-16
  A party's mere preference for privacy does not overcome the presumption of public access to judicial records, especially when asserting diversity jurisdiction.
• Rodriguez Cruz v. Anderson
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-02-13
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to articulate a basis for jurisdiction in his complaint.
• Rodriguez Cruz v. McLindon
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-02-13
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the pro se plaintiff failed to allege a federal claim or establish diversity jurisdiction.