615 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 389 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction because it did not demonstrate the citizenship of all members of the plaintiff LLC.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-11-07
The court held that the defendant failed to sufficiently allege the citizenship of the parties to establish diversity jurisdiction.
-
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction due to the lack of complete diversity between the plaintiff and a defendant, requiring remand to state court.
-
The court held that boilerplate objections are without merit and that a defendant cannot unilaterally stay discovery based on an alleged need for trade secret identification without filing a proper motion.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-09-11
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to reconsider its prior order remanding the case to state court, as such orders are generally unreviewable under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-07
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion for default judgment, awarding limited damages for breach of contract and granting declaratory relief regarding trademark ownership.
-
The court held that the complaint failed to adequately allege subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy.
-
The court held that the defendant's removal of the case was improper due to a lack of diversity jurisdiction and a violation of the forum defendant rule.
-
The court held that a defendant's removal of a case is timely if filed within 30 days of receiving an 'other paper' from which removability can be ascertained, even if the defendant had prior knowledge of facts suggesting removability before the initial pleading was filed.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-08-01
The court held that a limited partnership's citizenship for diversity purposes includes all its partners, and the defendant failed to establish diversity by only providing general partner citizenship.
-
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction due to potential lack of complete diversity and remanded the case to state court.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-07-28
The court held that the statements made by CNN, even if critical or negative, were expressions of opinion or rhetorical hyperbole, not false statements of fact, and therefore not actionable as defamation under Florida law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-07-17
The court held that the defendant failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-07-11
The court held that a fictitious party defendant's citizenship is disregarded for diversity jurisdiction purposes, and thus removal was proper.
-
The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal diversity jurisdiction because it did not adequately plead the plaintiffs' citizenship.
-
A court's diversity jurisdiction is based on the citizenship of the named parties, not potential parties who have not yet been joined.
-
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was insufficient because it failed to adequately allege the citizenship of the parties for diversity jurisdiction purposes.
-
The court found that the defendant's Notice of Removal was deficient because it failed to establish the plaintiffs' citizenship and the amount in controversy, and therefore, the court required further supplementation before determining jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-06-07
The court held that an amended class definition filed after removal may be considered when determining the applicability of CAFA's local controversy and discretionary exceptions, particularly when the amendment clarifies the original intent and does not seek to avoid federal juri
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to adequately plead diversity jurisdiction because it alleged residence rather than citizenship of the parties.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-06-02
The court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claims due to a lack of diversity and federal question jurisdiction, and potentially due to abstention doctrines.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-05-25
The court held that the defendant failed to establish the jurisdictional amount in controversy required for removal based on diversity jurisdiction.
-
The court held that the defendants' notice of removal was insufficient because it failed to properly allege diversity of citizenship.
-
The court held that the defendants failed to establish federal diversity jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence, as the evidence presented was insufficient to prove the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 at the time of removal.
-
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because complete diversity of citizenship was absent, requiring remand.
-
The court held that the amount in controversy was satisfied at the time of removal, and thus denied the motion to remand.
-
The court held that the complaint must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to allege facts establishing federal question, diversity, or statutory grant of jurisdiction.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint failed to adequately plead diversity jurisdiction because it did not properly allege the citizenship of the individual plaintiffs or the limited liability company defendants.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-03-20
The court held that the second amended complaint is a shotgun pleading and fails to establish subject matter jurisdiction, warranting dismissal.
-
The court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction due to a lack of complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and dismissed the case without prejudice.
-
Eight former students of Ringling College sued the college alleging various state law claims including constructive fraud, negligent supervision, and breach of contract, arising from their experiences with an associate dean who allegedly mishandled reports of misconduct and engag
-
The court held that defendants must amend their notice of removal to properly allege the citizenship of all parties, not just their residence, to establish diversity jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-01-30
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was timely filed because the initial complaint did not establish diversity of citizenship, and the thirty-day removal period began when the defendant received plaintiff's discovery responses clarifying her domicile.
-
The court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction due to incomplete alienage diversity and must remand the case to state court.
-
The court held that a rejected settlement offer, even if a check was issued, does not reduce the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction purposes.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-12-07
The Court lacks clear subject matter jurisdiction and requires parties to submit evidence to establish it.
-
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because one plaintiff was a U.S. citizen domiciled abroad, thus not a citizen of a state for diversity purposes.
-
The amount in controversy for determining federal diversity jurisdiction in a suit seeking to void a mortgage and quiet title is the value of the underlying property, not the face value of the mortgage.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-11-10
The court held that the defendant's objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation to remand were overruled, and the case was remanded to state court.
-
The court denied the motion for a temporary restraining order and ordered the plaintiff to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for default judgment because it failed to adequately establish subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over certain defendants.
-
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was deficient because it failed to establish diversity jurisdiction and comply with local rules.
-
The court held that it lacked sufficient information to determine subject-matter jurisdiction based on diversity and ordered parties to supplement the record with evidence of citizenship.
-
The court held that a motion to remand must be denied when the pleadings do not establish the citizenship of a party, and allegations of residency are insufficient to establish citizenship for diversity purposes.
-
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was insufficient because it failed to adequately allege the plaintiff's citizenship for diversity jurisdiction.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations of the defendant's citizenship were insufficient to establish diversity jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-08-19
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.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for default judgment because the plaintiff failed to adequately plead diversity jurisdiction, which is a prerequisite for the court to enter judgment.
-
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to insufficient pleading of diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy.