12,720 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 456 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-06-05
The court accepted the plaintiff's untimely second amended complaint but recommended dismissal because it failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and constituted a shotgun pleading.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-03
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state plausible claims for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the defendants and dismissed the second amended complaint with prejudice.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-06-03
The court held that a pro se plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis must state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which requires alleging a deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-02
The court held that the plaintiffs' amended complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading, failing to provide adequate notice of the claims against the defendants, and therefore recommended dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-02
The court held that a prisoner's § 1983 claim alleging excessive force is not barred by Heck v. Humphrey, even if factual allegations conflict with a prison disciplinary finding, as long as the claim does not necessarily imply the invalidity of that finding. The failure-to-interv
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-30
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and denied her motion for a preliminary injunction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-30
Summary judgment is granted for Defendant Selph as Plaintiff failed to show a serious medical need or deliberate indifference, and for the FDC Defendants as Plaintiff failed to show a violation of clearly established constitutional rights or that force was used maliciously.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-05-30
A state judge is entitled to absolute judicial immunity from monetary damages for acts taken in their judicial capacity, unless they acted in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-30
The court held that the prisoner's complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted due to multiple deficiencies, but dismissed it without prejudice to allow for an amended complaint.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-30
The court held that the plaintiff's objections to the magistrate judge's report were without merit and that the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-30
The court held that the amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and failed to state a claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, warranting dismissal with prejudice.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-05-29
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-29
The court held that the officers had probable cause to arrest the plaintiff for violating a county towing ordinance, and therefore granted summary judgment for the defendants on the false arrest and Section 1983 claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-29
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to exclude expert testimony because the court had previously ruled on similar motions and would entertain more specific objections at trial.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-29
The court held that the student failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits for his First Amendment claims regarding graduation attire.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-28
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.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-28
The court held that a pro se prisoner's "Notice of Intent to Sue" is not a valid complaint and that the prisoner failed to exhaust administrative remedies, warranting dismissal.
-
The court granted reconsideration of its prior order to certify the judgment for immediate appeal, finding no just reason for delay under Rule 54(b).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-28
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations, if true, sufficiently stated claims for warrantless entry and excessive force under the Fourth Amendment, but dismissed other claims and the claim against the City.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-05-28
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-27
Claims against Judge Flynn are dismissed with prejudice due to judicial immunity, and other claims are dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction under Younger abstention.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-27
Summary judgment is granted for defendants on all claims because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate genuine disputes of material fact or violations of clearly established law, and defendants are entitled to qualified immunity and sovereign immunity.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-23
A prisoner's complaint alleging deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious harm from a cellmate, or retaliation for filing grievances, fails to state a constitutional claim if it lacks specific factual allegations of threat or harm, and a mere denial of grievances d
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-23
The court dismissed all claims against Ellis County with prejudice and severed and transferred remaining claims against the transport company, finding further amendment unwarranted.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-23
The court held that the defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the plaintiff's excessive force claims related to the use of pepper spray and the application of handcuffs.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-05-21
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against the defendant courts and judges, due to various immunities and pleading deficiencies.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-05-21
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with court orders.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-20
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint is frivolous, malicious, and an abuse of the judicial process, warranting dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-20
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim because it is a shotgun pleading and the claims are time-barred.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-19
The court held that claims against judges and prosecutors are barred by absolute immunity, claims against the deputy are barred by reliance on a warrant, and claims against probation officials are barred by Heck v. Humphrey because the plaintiff was convicted.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-16
The court held that the plaintiff's Monell claims were deficient and dismissed them with prejudice because the allegations did not sufficiently establish a custom or policy of constitutional violations.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-16
The court held that a Bivens claim is improper against local police officers and that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and violated federal pleading rules.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-16
The court recommended granting dismissal for the hostile work environment and § 1983 claims, but denying dismissal for the unlawful discharge claims under the FCRA.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-05-16
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-15
The court held that claims against Richter and Payne are dismissed because the plaintiff failed to allege facts supporting their liability.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-14
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-14
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim under the Eighth Amendment because the alleged facts did not establish either an extreme condition of confinement or deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-14
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to extend the seal on the case beyond the standard 90-day period.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-14
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.
-
11th Cir.·
2025-05-13
Florida's Senate Bill 1438 criminalized knowingly admitting children to "adult live performances," including those depicting "lewd conduct," but the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held the law was likely unconstitutional on its face because the vague definition of "lewd conduc
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-12
The court held that the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction was denied, and the complaint was dismissed.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-05-12
The court recommended dismissal of the pro se plaintiff's complaint because he failed to truthfully disclose his litigation history, failed to state a claim against the defendants due to prosecutorial and public defender immunity, and failed to comply with a court order.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-12
The court held that the pro se plaintiff's amended complaint failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for various alleged constitutional violations.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-12
The court held that the complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and that the Title VII claims were untimely, warranting dismissal.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-05-09
The court held that the plaintiff's claims for unlawful stop, seizure, and false arrest were time-barred by the statute of limitations, and the malicious prosecution claim failed for failure to state a claim.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-09
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-08
The court held that the prisoner's pro se complaint was frivolous and failed to state a claim, warranting dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-07
The court dismissed the deliberate indifference claim, failure-to-intervene claims against most defendants, and excessive-force claims against three defendants, finding some claims duplicative or unsupported by factual allegations.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-07
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.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-06
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim for denial of access to courts or due process, and also failed to comply with local rules requiring verification.