943 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,362 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-02
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to deny the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the complaint without leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-02
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and personal jurisdiction over Chase Bank due to improper service, thus dismissing the complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-02
A public defender performing traditional legal functions is not a state actor and therefore cannot be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and failed to state a claim, but granted the plaintiff one opportunity to file a second amended complaint.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and that compensatory damages were barred by statute.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-11-28
The court held that a detention center is not a suable entity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and that slip-and-fall incidents do not constitute constitutional claims actionable under that statute.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-11-25
The court held that a pro se plaintiff's failure to truthfully disclose his litigation history on the court's required complaint form warrants dismissal without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-21
A state department of corrections is not a 'person' amenable to suit for monetary damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-11-21
The court held that the moving defendants are entitled to summary judgment because no reasonable jury could find they used excessive force, as the evidence showed they used no force or that any alleged force was de minimis.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-11-20
The court granted the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis but required an amended complaint because the original complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-20
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations of medical negligence and delayed medication refills do not rise to the level of an Eighth Amendment violation for deliberate indifference.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motions to proceed in forma pauperis, under a pseudonym, and for referral to the Volunteer Attorney Program, requiring an amended complaint.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-11-19
The court held that a pro se prisoner's failure to fully and accurately disclose his litigation history, as required by local rules and the court's complaint form, warrants dismissal of the case without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-18
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim for a constitutional violation regarding jail visitation.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-11-18
A pro se prisoner's civil rights case can be dismissed without prejudice for failing to accurately disclose prior litigation history on the court-approved complaint form, even if the failure was due to misunderstanding.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-11-18
A pro se litigant's failure to fully and accurately disclose their litigation history on the court's standardized complaint form, as required by local rules and under penalty of perjury, warrants dismissal of the case without prejudice.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-11-18
The court held that a prisoner's amended complaint failed to state a First Amendment claim because being denied a single religious meal did not constitute a substantial burden on his religious practice.
-
11th Cir.·
2025-11-17
The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2) with conditions, nor in its evidentiary rulings, affirming the trial court's judgments.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-17
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-17
The Court declined to dismiss the case with prejudice, finding that while sanctions were warranted for discovery violations, less drastic measures were appropriate given the circumstances, including the impact of hurricanes and the preference for hearing cases on the merits.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-14
A judge is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity and absolute judicial immunity for actions taken in her official capacity, and a state is not a 'person' under § 1983, warranting dismissal of the complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-14
The court held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because the decedent's actions in reaching for his handgun created an immediate threat, and thus no constitutional violation occurred. Consequently, the Monell claim against the city also failed.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-14
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was deficient for failing to meet federal pleading standards and directed him to amend it.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-14
The court held that federal courts must abstain from interfering in ongoing state criminal proceedings, and a § 1983 claim is not the proper vehicle to challenge guilt or prosecution.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-13
A public defender is not a state actor for purposes of a § 1983 claim, and federal courts must abstain from interfering in ongoing state criminal proceedings.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-13
The court granted summary judgment for the defendants on most counts, dismissing others for lack of standing, finding the plaintiff forfeited any protected liberty interest in accessing city property due to his trespass violations.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-11-13
A Miranda violation does not give rise to a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and a claim based on the Double Jeopardy Clause was not plausibly alleged.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-11-12
The court held that it should abstain from exercising jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claims under the domestic relations exception because the case is intertwined with ongoing state court child custody and divorce proceedings.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-11-12
The court held that a pro se plaintiff's failure to truthfully disclose his litigation history on the court's complaint form warrants dismissal of his civil rights action without prejudice.
-
11th Cir.·
2025-11-10
The court held that it has jurisdiction over the appeal because the denial of qualified immunity presents issues of law, not solely issues of fact.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-09
The court recommended denying the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the complaint without prejudice because it failed to comply with federal pleading rules and the plaintiff's financial information was inconsistent.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-06
The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and dismissed the federal claims with prejudice, declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible § 1983 claim against the defendant in his official capacity due to sovereign immunity and failed to establish supervisory liability. The court also held that state law claims for punitive damages against the defendant
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint should be dismissed with prejudice because the defendants are entitled to judicial immunity, the plaintiff is a "three-striker" who failed to pay the filing fee and did not allege imminent danger, and the plaintiff failed to truthfull
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-04
The court held that Plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for retaliation under the ADA, FCRA, and the First Amendment, and that the school board could not be held liable under § 1983 on theories of ratification or delegation.
-
The court held that it must abstain from hearing the civil-rights action under the Younger abstention doctrine due to an ongoing state criminal proceeding.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed without prejudice because it is duplicative of an earlier action and therefore malicious under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
-
The court accepted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the Plaintiff's motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.
-
The court recommended denial of the plaintiff's motions for temporary restraining orders because he failed to meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1) regarding immediate and irreparable injury and proper notice certification.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction and comply with pleading requirements, warranting dismissal.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-09-26
The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition challenging ongoing state criminal proceedings is subject to Younger abstention, and claims regarding conditions of confinement must be brought as a civil rights action.
-
The pro se inmate's civil rights complaint is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's pro se civil rights complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and thus was dismissed without prejudice.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim against the Baker County Sheriff Facility, the Baker County Sheriff, and ICE because the jail facility is not a suable entity, the Sheriff is not liable without personal involvement, and ICE is a federal agency not subject
-
A prisoner's civil rights complaint alleging false disciplinary reports and procedural issues in grievance processes fails to state a claim if it does not allege a constitutional deprivation or a physical injury.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for relief against either defendant under the Eighth Amendment for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.
-
The court held that the defendant is entitled to summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact regarding an unlawful search and the statute of limitations had expired.
-
A prisoner with three or more prior dismissals for frivolous or malicious actions cannot proceed in forma pauperis without paying the filing fee, unless under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice.