661 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 931 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-08-23
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction due to insufficient allegations of diversity of citizenship, requiring remand to state court.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's motion to remand should be granted because the addition of a non-diverse party destroyed diversity jurisdiction.
-
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold, thus granting the plaintiff's motion to remand.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-08-17
The court held that it lacked federal question jurisdiction because the plaintiff's complaint, which sought only eviction under state law, did not present a federal question.
-
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-08-07
The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding Plaintiff's claims, precluding summary judgment on most counts.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to properly plead the citizenship of an LLC, thus failing to establish diversity jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-07-25
The court held that the defendants failed to meet their burden of proving the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold, thus the case must be remanded.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-07-21
The court held that the plaintiff stated a colorable claim against the non-diverse defendant, thus the joinder was not fraudulent and the case must be remanded.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-07-19
The court held that genuine disputes of material fact exist regarding the substantial truth of the statements in the letter and whether the plaintiff is a limited public figure, thus denying both parties' motions for summary judgment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-07-11
A federal court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over a removed state-court eviction case where the removal is based on the plaintiff's counterclaims or defenses, and abstention is appropriate if the case were treated as originally filed in federal court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-06-30
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction, but granted leave to amend due to potential differences from prior actions. The motion to disqualify the magistrate judge was denied.
-
The court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss was moot due to an amended complaint and that the plaintiff failed to adequately allege diversity jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-06-02
The Court adopts in part the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, dismissing the case without prejudice because the complaint fails to state a claim and the Court lacks jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-31
The Court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's amended complaint and therefore dismissed the action without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-31
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case and therefore dismissed the action.
-
A defendant removing a case to federal court must provide specific factual allegations to establish diversity jurisdiction, including the citizenship of all parties and a plausible amount in controversy, which cannot be based on mere information and belief or conclusory statement
-
The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction based on diversity, as the amount in controversy was not facially apparent from the complaint and attached documents.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-13
The court denied Costco's motion for leave to file a third-party complaint because it failed to establish a basis for federal jurisdiction over the proposed third-party defendant.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-10
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's action and dismissed the case without prejudice.
-
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, despite demonstrating diversity of citizenship.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-25
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's pro se filing and dismissed the action without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-21
The court held that the plaintiff's third amended complaint must be dismissed with prejudice for failing to adequately allege jurisdiction, constituting an impermissible shotgun pleading, and violating local formatting rules.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-04-14
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed because it failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction and did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-04-14
The court held that permissive intervention is appropriate, but LEAD must provide evidence of its citizenship to establish federal jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-04-12
The court held that the amended complaint must be dismissed for failure to establish subject-matter jurisdiction and for failing to meet pleading standards under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 9(b).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-03-21
The court held that the defendant failed to establish the amount in controversy by a preponderance of the evidence, thus failing to demonstrate federal subject matter jurisdiction.
-
The court held that the remainder beneficiaries should be realigned as plaintiffs because the primary purpose of the lawsuit aligns their interests with the plaintiff, thus establishing diversity jurisdiction and denying the motion to remand.
-
The court held that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm, thus denying their motion for a preliminary injunction.
-
The court held that it lacked supplemental jurisdiction over the permissive counterclaim because it did not arise from a common nucleus of operative fact with the federal claims, and alternatively, would decline to exercise jurisdiction as it would substantially predominate over
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-01-31
The court held that the complaint failed to establish federal question jurisdiction or diversity jurisdiction, and thus dismissed all counts.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-01-26
The court held that the pro se plaintiffs' complaint must be dismissed without prejudice for failing to adequately allege subject-matter jurisdiction.
-
The court held that a complaint alleging diversity jurisdiction must state a party's citizenship, not merely their residence, to satisfy federal jurisdictional requirements.
-
The court held that the defendant failed to establish the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus federal jurisdiction was lacking and the case must be remanded.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to allege damages sufficient to meet the $75,000 jurisdictional amount for their conversion claim, thus dismissing the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-11-30
The Court strikes the pro se plaintiff's complaint for failing to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 10, and for failing to establish subject matter jurisdiction.
-
The court held that the defendants failed to establish diversity jurisdiction by not sufficiently identifying the domicile of the LLC members.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead the citizenship of the parties and the amount in controversy, requiring an amended complaint.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-11-02
The court held that a pro se litigant's application to proceed in forma pauperis must be denied and the case dismissed without prejudice if the complaint fails to state a claim or establish subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-10-21
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to cure deficiencies, lacked subject matter jurisdiction, and constituted a shotgun pleading, warranting dismissal.
-
11th Cir.·
2021-10-20
The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by staying the case in favor of parallel state court proceedings, as the core issue involved interpretation of a state-law marital settlement agreement.
-
The court held that removal was timely and diversity jurisdiction was sufficiently established, denying the plaintiff's motion to remand.
-
The court held that a motion to amend a complaint to add a party after removal must be denied if the movant fails to provide the substance of the proposed amendment or attach a copy, and if the proposed joinder would destroy diversity jurisdiction without a sufficient showing of
-
The court held that the defendants failed to sufficiently allege diversity jurisdiction, requiring them to provide more information.
-
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold, thus the motion to remand is granted.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-09-22
The court indicated it would grant the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction if the appellate court relinquishes jurisdiction, finding Kouri Group to be an indispensable party whose joinder would destroy diversity.
-
The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy, requiring supplementation.
-
The court held that the removal was timely, the defendant did not waive its right to remove, and diversity jurisdiction was established, thus denying the plaintiff's motion for remand.
-
The court granted plaintiff's motion for leave to conduct limited jurisdictional discovery regarding the citizenship of defendant Franklin Madison Group, LLC.
-
The court held that the defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the jurisdictional requirement for diversity jurisdiction.