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
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for relief under the Eighth Amendment for prison conditions, medical deliberate indifference, or failure to protect.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for excessive force because the body camera footage contradicted his allegations of being subdued and not resisting, and the force used was reasonable under the circumstances.
-
A prisoner's failure to disclose all prior lawsuits on a complaint form, constituting an abuse of the judicial process, warrants dismissal without prejudice.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint, even when liberally construed, failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-08
Pro se prisoner Jimmie Lee Clark filed a handwritten letter and mandamus petition claiming ineffective assistance of appellate counsel in state court. The federal district court dismissed the filing without prejudice for failure to comply with procedural requirements, directing C
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because his allegations were conclusory, failed to establish a constitutional deprivation, and did not meet the requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because his allegations of cell door rattling did not establish an objective substantial risk of serious harm or a sufficiently culpable state of mind, nor did he allege official policy as the moving
-
Once a federal court determined that deputies' use of deadly force was reasonable and necessary to prevent imminent harm, they became immune under Florida Statute § 776.032(1) from any subsequent civil action, and the trial court erred in denying sanctions under § 57.105(1) becau
-
The court held that the prisoner's complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted due to various deficiencies, including improper defendants and failure to meet legal standards for constitutional claims.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's challenge to his burglary conviction is barred by Heck v. Humphrey, and his challenge to his robbery conviction requires abstention under the Younger doctrine.
-
The court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed because he is a "three-striker" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and the complaint is frivolous.
-
The court held that dismissal for lack of prosecution under Rule 41(b) and Local Rule 3.10 is appropriate due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with court orders and participate in discovery.
-
The court held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity, thus dismissing the federal claims and declining supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-05
The court held that claims against Deputy Williams in his official capacity are dismissed as duplicative, but individual capacity claims for viewpoint discrimination and retaliation survive. Prior restraint claim against Deputy is dismissed due to qualified immunity. Monell claim
-
Verbal sexual harassment and gestures by a prison official, without more, do not rise to the level of a constitutional violation under the Eighth Amendment.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations against Nurse Bader did not sufficiently state a claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need.
-
A prisoner's civil rights complaint is dismissed without prejudice as malicious for failing to truthfully disclose prior litigation history on the court form.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief against most defendants and was dismissed without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-24
The court held that the deputy had probable cause for the arrest based on a modified exhaust violation and resisting arrest, thus granting qualified immunity and dismissing the § 1983 claims.
-
Keith Soanes, an inmate in the Florida Department of Corrections, filed a pro se civil rights complaint alleging that defendants violated his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights by deleting his incoming and outgoing emails and scanned mail without notice, and by issuing vague c
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-02-20
Claims against two officers are dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and the negligence claim against the remaining officer is dismissed due to sovereign immunity, but the request for punitive damages may proceed.
-
A trial court abuses its discretion when it admits evidence of racial discrimination in a case where the plaintiff failed to plead racial discrimination in the operative complaint. The plaintiff must plead both his race and that he was arrested for racial reasons; evidence of dis
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-02-06
The court recommended denying the petition for a writ of mandamus because the federal mandamus statute does not permit relief against state actors and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 addresses the constitutional issues raised.
-
The court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim for excessive force and that the Sheriff's Office was not a suable entity.
-
The court held that a prisoner who is a "three-striker" and fails to pay the filing fee, and does not allege imminent danger of serious physical injury, must have their case dismissed.
-
Kevin Lamar Blake, an inmate, brought a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against four prison officials alleging sexual harassment, excessive force, retaliation, and denial of religious meals. The district court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, finding that Bla
-
An inmate's Eighth Amendment excessive force claims against correctional officers arising from two cell extractions performed on July 11, 2018, failed because the undisputed evidence showed the officers used only the force necessary to overcome the inmate's non-compliance with la
-
The court held that the deputy did not have arguable probable cause to arrest the plaintiff for obstruction of justice, denying qualified immunity on the false arrest claim.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-01-23
In this civil rights case, pro se plaintiff Johnson sued twenty defendants claiming a coordinated conspiracy to obstruct his underlying civil RICO litigation, bringing claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(3), and 1986. The court denied Johnson's motion to proceed in forma pauperi
-
The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief and improperly joined unrelated claims.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, requiring dismissal of his claims.
-
Official-capacity claims against state employees for damages are barred by the Eleventh Amendment, as they are equivalent to claims against the state itself, and the State of Florida has not waived its sovereign immunity.
-
A prisoner who has had three or more prior actions dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or failing to state a claim, and who has not paid the filing fee or demonstrated imminent danger, must have their complaint dismissed under the 'three-strikes' provision.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to comply with court orders and pay the initial partial filing fee.
-
The court held that the case should be dismissed without prejudice due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with court orders regarding payment of filing fees or submission of an IFP motion.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-01-10
A prisoner's failure to accurately disclose prior litigation history on a complaint form, even if unintentional, constitutes an abuse of the judicial process and warrants dismissal of the case without prejudice as malicious.
-
The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to dismiss federal claims and decline supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims.
-
A prisoner with three prior dismissals ('three strikes') cannot proceed in forma pauperis unless they allege imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time of filing.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice.
-
The court held that the amended complaint fails to state claims against most defendants due to insufficient identification or lack of factual allegations, but allows the excessive force claim against Lieutenant DeEsposito to proceed.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2024-12-13
The court held that the complaint must be dismissed because the defendant judges are entitled to absolute judicial immunity for the acts alleged.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's direct emergency grievance, denied because the matter was under investigation, constituted exhaustion of administrative remedies, and that the plaintiff's alleged injuries were sufficient to overcome the PLRA's de minimis physical injury requir
-
The court held that the plaintiff's excessive force and Eighth Amendment claims are not barred by Heck v. Humphrey, and he has alleged sufficient physical injury to pursue compensatory damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e), and punitive damages are available. However, the ADA claim
-
A pro se litigant sued the Perdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collins & Mott law firm and five Volusia Sheriff's Office officers, alleging an extensive conspiracy to defraud him and others through fraudulent collection practices and unconstitutional conduct over a twenty-year period. The
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-11-22
The court held that most of the plaintiff's claims failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, but claims of First Amendment retaliation against certain deputies remain pending.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for an Eighth Amendment violation against the medical defendants and the corporate defendant, and that claims against a John Doe defendant were dismissed for improper venue.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate failed to state a plausible claim under the Eighth Amendment against either defendant, warranting dismissal.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to state a claim and was due to be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with court orders and for failing to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's pro se complaint must be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.