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
-
Nihal Michael Gautam sued the City of Sunrise and multiple police officers under federal civil rights laws and state law, alleging false arrest, excessive force, failure to intervene, municipal liability, civil RICO violations, and violations of Florida's Public Records Act stemm
-
The court held that the complaint must be dismissed without prejudice because the jail is not a legal entity amenable to suit and the medical provider was not alleged to have a policy or custom of deliberate indifference.
-
The court denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment, finding genuine disputes of material fact regarding the plaintiff's claims of excessive force and battery.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-04
The court held that Plaintiff sufficiently alleged disability discrimination under the ADA and FCRA, and retaliation under the Rehabilitation Act, but failed to state claims for retaliation under the ADA, FCRA, and First Amendment.
-
A prisoner who has had three prior actions dismissed as frivolous or malicious must pay the full filing fee and cannot proceed in forma pauperis unless they are under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the prisoner's civil rights complaint without prejudice due to failure to truthfully disclose litigation history and improper venue.
-
The court held that Deputy Barnes is entitled to qualified immunity because his use of force was objectively reasonable and not a violation of clearly established law, and that the plaintiff failed to establish a deliberate indifference claim against Sheriff Chronister.
-
The court denied the defendant's motion to reopen discovery because the defendant failed to show good cause and excusable neglect.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-22
The court held that the prisoner's pro se civil rights complaint was deficient for failing to use the required form, pay the filing fee, or move to proceed in forma pauperis, and for failing to meet the requirements for a temporary restraining order.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's civil rights complaints failed to state a claim because they did not allege direct involvement of defendants, relied on theories not actionable under Section 1983, or named entities not subject to suit. The court dismissed the complaints but gr
-
A prisoner's civil rights complaint is dismissed without prejudice for failing to truthfully disclose prior litigation history, as required by the court's complaint form and signed under penalty of perjury.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-16
The court held that the prisoner's pro se complaint was deficient for failing to use the required form, pay the filing fee, or move for IFP, and for failing to meet the standards for a temporary restraining order.
-
2025 WL 1923126·
N.D. Fla.·
2025-07-15
The court recommended dismissal of the plaintiff's amended complaint without prejudice.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted due to insufficient factual allegations and improper form, and that his IFP motion was legally insufficient.
-
Fla. 3d DCA·
2025-07-07
Appellants lack standing to bring a removal action under the Citizens' Bill of Rights, and the removal provision requires a finding that the City itself violated the charter, not merely that a city official violated it in his individual capacity.
-
The court held that the admission of the plaintiff's prior conviction and drug use evidence was proper, and denied the plaintiff's motion for a new trial. The court also denied the plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to file an appeal.
-
The court held that a prisoner's failure to truthfully disclose his litigation history on court forms constitutes an abuse of the judicial process, warranting dismissal of the case.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-30
The court held that the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction must be denied because she failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits, specifically the 'color of law' element required for a § 1983 claim.
-
A prisoner's claim of excessive force against an individual officer may proceed, but claims against supervisors based on respondeat superior, claims regarding jail commissary prices, and claims against public defenders are dismissed.
-
The court held that venue was not proper in the Southern District of New York and transferred the case to the Southern District of Florida for convenience and in the interest of justice.
-
The court held that a blanket protective order is not warranted based solely on the number of requests for admission, and a motion to compel must be filed in the district where compliance is required.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-25
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of her § 1983 claim because she did not demonstrate that the defendants' conduct occurred under the "color of law."
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-24
The court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint was a shotgun pleading and dismissed it without prejudice, granting leave to amend.
-
Plaintiff's claims against a deceased defendant must be dismissed without prejudice when the plaintiff fails to comply with court orders to identify a personal representative or dismiss the claims.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-18
The court held that a pretrial detainee's habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is not a proper avenue for claims that should be raised in the criminal case or a separate civil rights action.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's grievances, which focused solely on inadequate medical treatment, did not provide sufficient notice of his claims for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act, and therefore, he failed to exhaus
-
The court held that Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Lane are dismissed, official capacity claims for damages are dismissed, and the request for termination of an employee is stricken, but claims against Defendants Pope-Jones and Boone regarding excessive force and failure to
-
The court recommended dismissal of the complaint because it failed to state a claim, sought relief against immune defendants, and was frivolous in part. Claims against Judge Harper were recommended for dismissal with prejudice due to judicial immunity, while claims against other
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to proceed anonymously, as his privacy interests did not outweigh the presumption of open judicial proceedings.
-
A prisoner who is a 'three-striker' under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) must pay the filing fee unless they allege facts showing they are in imminent danger of serious physical injury.
-
The court held that Sergeant Marckioli is entitled to qualified immunity because his use of deadly force was objectively reasonable under the circumstances, and even if it were not, the right was not clearly established.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with court orders.
-
The court recommended transferring the case to the District of Arizona because it is a more convenient forum, as a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred there and the Northern District of Florida lacks personal jurisdiction over the City of Phoenix.
-
The court held that claims against certain defendants must be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a plausible claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the defendant, both in his official and individual capacities.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed as a shotgun pleading, fails to name proper defendants, and fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because his allegations did not establish a constitutional deprivation, lacked required elements for specific claims, and sought relief not available in a civil rights action.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered an amended complaint due to deficiencies in both the motion and the complaint.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate's pro se complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under the Eighth Amendment or the ADA.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-04-30
The court held that the petitioner's filing, though styled as a civil rights complaint, was in substance a habeas corpus petition. The court determined it lacked jurisdiction and recommended transfer.
-
The court recommended granting the motion to dismiss the failure to protect, Monell, negligent retention, and negligent training claims, but denying the motion to dismiss the failure to intervene claim.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's claims against the judge are barred by absolute judicial immunity and the claims against the county are frivolous due to lack of responsibility and insufficient allegations.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate failed to state a plausible claim for deliberate indifference under the Eighth Amendment because he did not allege facts showing personal involvement or subjective recklessness by the defendants.
-
A prisoner's failure to accurately disclose prior litigation history on a court form, even if claimed to be due to misunderstanding, constitutes an abuse of the judicial process warranting dismissal of the case as malicious.
-
The court held that the complaint was dismissed without prejudice because it was an impermissible shotgun pleading, violated local rules, and the plaintiffs could not proceed jointly.
-
The court held that dismissal without prejudice is appropriate for a pro se prisoner's failure to comply with court orders and maintain a current address.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with court orders regarding payment of the filing fee or filing an in forma pauperis motion.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for relief under the Eighth Amendment for excessive force or deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.