521 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,043 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The court recommended dismissal of the complaint without prejudice because it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, but granted the plaintiff leave to amend.
-
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 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.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint fails to state an Eighth Amendment claim because it does not sufficiently allege extreme conditions or deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, nor does it identify a custom or policy causing the alleged harm.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-20
The court held that the plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts to establish a plausible claim for unlawful detainment under § 1983 against the moving defendants, as they were not personally involved in the decision to detain the plaintiff.
-
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
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-06-11
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis because the complaint failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
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.
-
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 dismissed all claims against Ellis County with prejudice and severed and transferred remaining claims against the transport company, finding further amendment unwarranted.
-
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'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 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 failed to state plausible federal claims under the ADA and the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and therefore should decline supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims.
-
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 dismissal without prejudice is appropriate for a pro se prisoner's failure to comply with court orders and maintain a current address.
-
The court held that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion and probable cause for the arrest, and that the use of force was excessive, denying dismissal for these claims. However, the court dismissed the vicarious liability and negligent hiring/retention claims against the City
-
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-18
The court held that claims against supervisors and the city based on respondeat superior are dismissed, and claims against officers without direct involvement are also dismissed. A pro se plaintiff has no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a civil damages action.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
The court denied the defendants' motion for certification for an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
-
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 plaintiff's amended complaint was insufficient to proceed because it failed to state a claim under § 1983 and did not comply with Florida's Medical Malpractice Act.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the County and Sheriff, and thus, the motions to dismiss were granted.
-
Plaintiff Rosato, an involuntarily committed resident of the Florida Civil Commitment Center, sued four FCCC officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for allegedly denying him the opportunity to freely practice his Wiccan faith and for erroneous denial of a grievance. The court dismissed
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-14
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim under Section 1983 because it alleged negligence, respondeat superior, de minimis injuries, and insufficient emotional damages without physical injury, and that the named defendants were not proper parties.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-14
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint suffers from numerous pleading deficiencies, including shotgun pleading, failure to state a claim, and claims against immune parties, warranting dismissal unless cured by a second amended complaint.
-
The court held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity, thus dismissing the federal claims and declining supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims.
-
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 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.
-
Earl Lee Dorey sued law enforcement officers under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, claiming they used excessive force against him during an arrest in September 2019, when deputies attempted to apprehend him at a residence in Oxford, Florida. The district court granted the defendants' mot
-
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
-
The court recommended granting the City's motion to dismiss, finding both the § 1983 claim and the wrongful death claim failed to state a plausible claim for relief.
-
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 the plaintiff failed to establish claims for age/disability discrimination and First Amendment retaliation because the adverse employment actions were based on performance issues, not discriminatory or retaliatory motives, and there was no evidence linking the
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because the defendants, as private entities, did not act under color of state law, and the complaint was a shotgun pleading.
-
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-01-21
The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under § 1983 and that her state law claims for negligence and defamation were barred by sovereign immunity and failure to comply with statutory notice requirements.
-
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-01-15
The court held that the plaintiff's claims against the judge and prosecutors are barred by immunity, the claim against the Sheriff's Office is improper, and the claims against the deputies are not clearly alleged, but granted plaintiff an opportunity to amend.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under § 1983.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice.
-
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 held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for an Eighth Amendment violation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the defendants.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and should be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
-
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.