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
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-08
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction and failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, warranting dismissal.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-04-08
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
The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to review the plaintiff's challenge to his prior state court conviction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and that other claims fail to state a claim or are time-barred.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-07
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-07
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations sounded in negligence and failed to state a federal claim under § 1983, and thus the case was dismissed without prejudice.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-04-07
The court held that the defendants are entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity, and thus the plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-07
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
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-07
The court held that boilerplate objections to discovery requests are waived, and parties must provide specific reasons for objections. The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to compel, ordering some discovery and denying other requests.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-04
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish genuine issues of material fact on his claims of excessive seclusion, procedural due process violations, denial of access to courts, and retaliation, entitling the defendants to summary judgment.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-04
An inmate diabetic at a Florida correctional facility sued Aramark Correctional Services and a food service director under Section 1983, alleging that inadequate meals violated his Eighth Amendment rights by failing to provide required calories and nutrition from March 2022 to No
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-03
A complaint must comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 10, and supervisory officials are not liable under § 1983 for the acts of their subordinates unless they personally participated in the harm.
-
The Court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to dismiss the action without prejudice, overruling the plaintiff's objections.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-02
The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint is dismissed without prejudice because it constitutes a shotgun pleading, failing to provide adequate notice of the claims against each defendant.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-31
The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend, allowing her to file a second amended complaint, and denied the defendant's motion to dismiss as moot.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-03-31
In this Fourth Amendment civil rights case, sheriff's deputies responded to a welfare check call regarding a potentially missing child and conducted a "knock and talk" at the plaintiff's home, which escalated when the plaintiff answered the door holding a firearm—after disarming
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-31
The court denied the defendants' motion for certification for an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-28
The court held that the defendant deputy sheriff is not entitled to qualified immunity for ordering an investigatory strip search without reasonable suspicion, and that a violation of Florida Statute § 901.211 can form the basis for a common law negligence claim.
-
Fla. 6th DCA·
2025-03-28
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 adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss the plaintiff's amended complaint without leave to amend.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits for a preliminary injunction because he did not allege sufficient facts to show the private towing company acted under color of state law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-28
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-27
The court held that the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order was moot due to his transfer and that his motion for appointment of counsel was denied as there were no exceptional circumstances.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-03-26
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-26
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint, like the original, constituted a shotgun pleading and failed to state a claim, warranting dismissal.
-
The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting the defendants' motion to tax attorneys' fees against the plaintiff.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-24
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.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-03-24
The court affirmed the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting in part and denying in part the motion to dismiss, and dismissing the plaintiff's amended complaint with prejudice.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-03-21
The court held that the case must be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to allege a federal question and the parties were not diverse.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-21
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.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-03-20
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-20
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim for violation of constitutional rights due to insufficient factual allegations regarding conditions of confinement and deliberate indifference to medical needs.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-20
The court held that the plaintiff's civil rights claims were properly dismissed because they were barred by Heck v. Humphrey, the defendants were immune, or the claims failed to state a plausible claim for relief.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-18
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and is therefore dismissed.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-18
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.·
2025-03-17
Claims against prison officials Johns and Adams are dismissed because the plaintiff failed to plausibly allege they were deliberately indifferent to a substantial risk of serious harm.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-17
The court held that the Eleventh Amendment bars the plaintiff's claims against the State of Florida, and the complaint fails to state a claim under Rule 8 and the Posse Comitatus Act.
-
The court held that the defendants are entitled to summary judgment on all claims, including those for Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment violations, due to lack of genuine dispute of material fact and the existence of probable cause, as well as qualified immunity.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-17
The court granted the motion to dismiss in part, dismissing most claims due to procedural defects like shotgun pleading, improper party joinder, and lack of factual support, but allowed a Fourth Amendment claim against Officer Greene for an unlawful personal search to proceed.
-
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-14
The court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1985, and that the Sheriff's Department was not a suable entity.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-13
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for viewpoint discrimination or a Monell claim against the city, granting the defendants' motions to dismiss.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-13
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing the Section 1983 malicious prosecution and defamation claims with leave to amend, but allowing the false arrest, state law malicious prosecution, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-12
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for denial of access to courts or violation of privacy rights, and that official capacity suits against JSO employees were improper.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-11
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint, which raised claims identical to those previously dismissed, should be dismissed without leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-11
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim and is subject to dismissal under the PLRA and Younger abstention doctrine.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-10
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-10
The court held that the Osceola County Sheriff's Office is not a legal entity subject to suit under Florida law, requiring dismissal of the complaint.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-03-07
The court held that the amended complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a claim and because the claims are barred by the statute of limitations.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-06
The court held that the prisoner's complaint failed to state a claim for cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.