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
-
Sandra and John Corbin sued Charlotte County Sheriff's Office deputies for excessive force, false arrest, and deliberate indifference to medical needs following Sandra's arrest during a traffic stop, where Deputy Aaron Williams leg-swept her, causing a fractured tibia. The court
-
Fla. 4th DCA·
2024-07-17
Florida Statute § 111.071(1)(a) prohibits a municipality from paying a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights judgment where the officer has been determined in the final judgment to have caused the harm intentionally. Because the federal jury found the officers intentionally violated the
-
In this case, three innocent bystanders shot by a police officer while sitting in a parked car at a restaurant drive-through sued the officer and county for excessive force and related state law torts. The court denied the officer's motion to dismiss the Fourth Amendment excessiv
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to state a claim for deliberate indifference under the Eighth Amendment, and further amendment would be futile.
-
The court held that while the magistrate judge's denial of compelling pre-incident medical records was not clearly erroneous, the plaintiff must now execute a release for those records because his medical condition is at issue. The court also affirmed the denial of expenses.
-
The court held that a plaintiff may not file duplicative complaints to expand their legal rights, and dismissed the current case for improper claim splitting.
-
A prisoner who has incurred three or more 'strikes' under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) cannot proceed in forma pauperis unless they allege specific facts showing imminent danger of serious physical injury.
-
The court granted Defendant Walden's motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. The court denied the FDOC Defendants' motion to dismiss regarding the plaintiff's failure to disclose litigation h
-
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations of negligence in failing to assist her into a transport van do not rise to the level of a constitutional violation under the Eighth Amendment.
-
The court held that it must abstain from hearing a civil-rights complaint when it interferes with ongoing state criminal proceedings and child custody matters, as no exceptions to the Younger abstention doctrine apply.
-
The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendations, dismissing the complaint without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the imminent danger exception to the PLRA's three-strikes rule.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to state a plausible claim for deliberate indifference against any of the named defendants.
-
The court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) because it lacks arguable merit in law or fact.
-
The court granted the motion to dismiss, finding that the Sheriff's Office was an improper defendant, official capacity claims were redundant, individual capacity claims against the Sheriff failed for lack of personal involvement, and the remaining claims were barred by qualified
-
The court held that federal courts must abstain from hearing a civil-rights complaint that is inextricably bound up with an ongoing state-court criminal prosecution under the Younger abstention doctrine.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate sufficiently alleged an Eighth Amendment claim for excessive force, and thus the defendant's motion to dismiss was denied.
-
The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently exhausted administrative remedies for his failure to protect claims and that his request for punitive damages is not statutorily barred.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate sufficiently exhausted his administrative remedies by filing an informal grievance that was approved and referred to the Inspector General's Office, even though he did not complete the subsequent formal grievance and appeal stages.
-
The court held that the pro se civil rights complaint must be dismissed because it was filed outside the applicable four-year statute of limitations.
-
The court held that the complaint failed to state a claim against most defendants, but allowed the plaintiff to amend his complaint regarding claims against Dr. Miller and Nurse Uney.
-
A public defender performing traditional legal functions is not acting under color of state law for § 1983 claims, and speedy trial claims for release require habeas corpus.
-
A pro se prisoner's civil-rights complaint alleging confiscation of a prison-issued tablet and purchased music fails to state a claim because the prisoner lacks a constitutionally protected property interest in the tablet and has adequate post-deprivation remedies under state law
-
The court held that the pro se plaintiff failed to state a viable § 1983 claim against the Sheriff's Department or Sheriff Gualtieri, and that claims based solely on state law are not actionable under § 1983.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-04-01
The court held that a First Amendment retaliation claim based on a 2013 contract non-renewal and rejection for an audit committee position were properly dismissed, but the claim regarding the Director of Risk Management position was sufficiently pleaded to survive dismissal.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint was deficient and failed to state a claim, warranting dismissal.
-
The court held that Eleventh Amendment immunity bars claims for monetary damages against state officials in their official capacities. The court also found that the use of force by Sgt. R. Molinski was not objectively unreasonable under the Eighth Amendment, and thus, summary jud
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for relief against the defendant judge and attorney under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
A prosecutor is entitled to absolute immunity for actions taken during a criminal prosecution, and a malicious prosecution claim requires termination in the plaintiff's favor.
-
The court held that the deputy's use of a single kick to subdue a suspect who had partially complied but still posed a potential threat was objectively reasonable and did not violate clearly established law, thus granting qualified immunity. The court also found the sheriff immun
-
A judge and prosecutors are entitled to absolute immunity from damages for their official acts, and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act does not apply to individuals or provide immunity from criminal prosecution.
-
The court held that claims against the prosecutor and defense counsel are dismissed with prejudice, while claims against law enforcement officers are dismissed without prejudice pending amendment.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaints were impermissible shotgun pleadings and failed to state a claim, but granted leave to amend.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-02-12
A magistrate judge has the authority to transfer a case for improper venue.
-
The court granted in part and denied in part defendant's motion in limine, excluding certain anticipated evidence and arguments as irrelevant or inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
-
The court held that the plaintiff prisoner's allegations sufficiently pleaded claims for excessive force, failure to intervene, assault, and battery, thus denying the defendants' motions to dismiss based on qualified immunity and failure to state a claim.
-
The court held that excessive force claims against two deputies may proceed, but claims against medical providers, a supervisor, and the county are dismissed.
-
The court held that Plaintiff failed to state a plausible conspiracy claim against the nurse defendants, but denied the motion to strike and found Plaintiff had exhausted administrative remedies for the conspiracy claim.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate failed to properly exhaust administrative remedies as required by the PLRA and FDOC procedures.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's claims for declaratory relief and monetary damages against defendants in their official capacities are dismissed due to lack of standing and Eleventh Amendment immunity, respectively.
-
11th Cir.·
2024-01-10
Andrew Warren, an elected state attorney suspended by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, sued under federal law claiming the suspension violated his First Amendment rights when DeSantis punished him for signing advocacy statements on abortion and transgender rights and for implementi
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-01-09
The court held that the City of Miami is entitled to sovereign immunity for the plaintiff's claims, and Officer Davis is entitled to qualified immunity on the First Amendment retaliation claim, but not on the false arrest and excessive force claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-01-04
The court held that public defenders are not state actors for § 1983 claims, and claims against Lake County defendants failed for lack of policy/custom. Claims against the clerk were dismissed due to quasi-judicial immunity. Some retaliation claims against deputies remain.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a municipal liability claim against the City of Tampa and that the claim against the chief of police was redundant.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate sufficiently exhausted his administrative remedies despite his appeals being returned without action, as the appeals were improperly rejected by prison officials.
-
Consolidating four related federal cases, the court ruled on discovery disputes in death row inmates' Eighth Amendment challenges to Florida's three-drug lethal injection protocol using etomidate, rocuronium bromide, and potassium acetate. The court granted the inmates' motions t
-
A pro se plaintiff's complaint was dismissed because it constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
The court denied the defendants' motion for sanctions seeking dismissal because the defendants failed to provide proof of proper notice for the plaintiff's depositions.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-12-21
The court held that the Florida Department of Corrections is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment, and thus claims for monetary relief against it must be dismissed.
-
The Court denied the City of Clearwater's motion to dismiss state law claims, finding that sovereign immunity did not apply at this stage and that factual allegations were sufficient to potentially support claims for negligent hiring and retention.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint improperly joined unrelated claims and failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, but granted leave to amend the medical claim.