520 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 195 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
The court held that the Quiet Title Act's statute of limitations barred the railroad's action to quiet title because the railroad had actual notice of the government's interest in restricting land use since 1938.
-
942 F.2d 1498·
10th Cir.·
1991-08-26
·cited 4×
The court held that judicial and governmental defendants are immune from suit, and the bankruptcy trustee is also immune for actions taken in execution of court orders.
-
940 F.2d 73·
4th Cir.·
1991-07-09
·cited 4×
The court held that Mobil's suit presented a justiciable case or controversy, as the threat of enforcement of newly enacted VPPFA amendments created a substantial controversy warranting declaratory judgment.
-
932 F.2d 256·
3d Cir.·
1991-05-06
·cited 4×
The court held that claims alleging direct violations of the Clean Air Act's statutory provisions, rather than violations of an existing emission standard or limitation within an approved plan, must be brought as petitions for review in the courts of appeals under § 7607, not as
-
924 F.2d 1011·
11th Cir.·
1991-02-27
·cited 4×
The court held that when a defendant challenges diversity jurisdiction based on domicile and the district court dismisses without an evidentiary hearing, the plaintiff must only establish a prima facie case of jurisdiction.
-
919 F.2d 1333·
8th Cir.·
1990-11-28
·cited 4×
The court held that the district court erred by converting a motion to dismiss into a summary judgment motion without providing the parties an opportunity to respond, and by improperly applying Arkansas' assumption of risk doctrine as a complete bar to recovery.
-
The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that no implied private right of action exists under the CTRA or 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2) for an employee discharged for cooperating with a federal investigation.
-
843 F.2d 1362·
Fed. Cir.·
1988-04-05
·cited 4×
The Claims Court erred in dismissing Cooper's complaint for lack of jurisdiction because the facts alleged could support a Tucker Act claim based on an implied contract.
-
792 F.2d 802·
9th Cir.·
1986-06-18
·cited 4×
California's Elections Code provisions that dictate the membership of state central committees, the term of office for committee chairs, and prohibit preprimary endorsements by central committees violate the First Amendment rights of political parties to freedom of association an
-
761 F.2d 970·
4th Cir.·
1985-05-08
·cited 4×
The court held that a hospital's revocation of a physician's privileges, even with federal funding and regulatory oversight, does not constitute state action under the Fourteenth Amendment absent coercive power or significant encouragement from the state.
-
Allegations of 'shifting' interstate commerce are sufficient to satisfy the Sherman Act's jurisdictional requirement and withstand dismissal under both Rule 12(b)(1) and Rule 12(b)(6).
-
554 F. Supp. 347·
M.D. Fla.·
1983-01-31
·cited 4×
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claims for damages arising from the termination of Social Security benefits, due to the Social Security Act's limitations and Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity.
-
697 F.2d 97·
3d Cir.·
1982-12-29
·cited 4×
The court held that Max Nobel's resignation was effective for diversity jurisdiction purposes, the prior state action was not res judicata, Menallen had standing as equitable owner, and the finding on the date of coal removal was clearly erroneous.
-
618 F.2d 597·
9th Cir.·
1980-05-12
·cited 4×
The dissenting judge believes the case should be remanded to determine if an investment contract was formed and if reliance on disclosure occurred.
-
623 F.2d 128·
10th Cir.·
1979-11-26
·cited 4×
The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by dismissing the complaint as moot without determining class certification, especially when the issue might evade review.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-04-22
·cited 3×
The court held that it has the discretion to dismiss a case without prejudice for failure to comply with local rules, specifically for failing to respond to a motion to dismiss.
-
607 F. Supp. 2d 1336·
S.D. Fla.·
2009-04-07
·cited 3×
A federal court lacks jurisdiction over an insurance claim dispute when the insurer is still within the policy's contestable period and actively investigating the claim, as the matter is not yet ripe for adjudication.
-
The court found that Plaintiff had standing to challenge specific permitting provisions of the Ordinance for lack of circumscribed time and limitless discretion, but not other constitutional claims.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs' allegations were too conclusory, vague, and attenuated to adequately plead a violation of the law of nations, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Claims Act.
-
319 F. Supp. 2d 1354·
S.D. Fla.·
2004-05-24
·cited 3×
The court held that Younger abstention applies, requiring dismissal of the federal complaint due to ongoing state proceedings concerning the same issues.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's claim falls under admiralty jurisdiction, thus precluding a remedy under the FTCA, and that the plaintiff failed to meet the jurisdictional requirements of the EAJA for his admiralty claims.
-
910 F. Supp. 609·
M.D. Fla.·
1995-11-29
·cited 3×
The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted for violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, § 1985(3), RICO, and constitutional amendments, and also lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
898 F. Supp. 1549·
S.D. Fla.·
1994-02-28
·cited 3×
The court granted the Miccosukee Tribal Court's motion to dismiss and granted in part and denied in part the remaining defendants' motion to dismiss, finding federal question jurisdiction over challenges to tribal court jurisdiction and actions exceeding sovereign powers.
-
837 F. Supp. 1158·
M.D. Fla.·
1993-11-10
·cited 3×
The court held that the defendants, as private actors, did not act under color of state law, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction for the federal claims and pendant jurisdiction for the state claims.
-
957 F.2d 178·
5th Cir.·
1992-04-01
·cited 3×
The court held that the MDP Plan did not constitute an "employee welfare benefit plan" under ERISA because MDP did not act as an "employer" as defined by the statute. Therefore, the district court correctly dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
-
777 F.2d 303·
5th Cir.·
1985-11-29
·cited 3×
The court held that the discretionary function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act deprives the district court of subject matter jurisdiction, barring the suit.
-
106 F.4th 1091·
11th Cir.·
2024-06-28
·cited 2×
The Eleventh Circuit held that the residents waived their objections to the district court's dismissal based on Colorado River abstention and affirmed the denial of their motion to amend due to a failure to timely object.
-
The court found that the Anti-Terrorism Act does not preclude Alien Tort Statute claims for terrorism by non-U.S. nationals, and that the ATS may recognize claims for terrorism if they meet specific international law criteria.
-
The court held that "legal research" constitutes a permissible use under the Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA), and an authorized recipient of information does not need to independently establish a permissible use for its own activities.
-
626 F. Supp. 2d 1251·
S.D. Fla.·
2009-06-14
·cited 2×
The court held that the agreement language and surrounding circumstances demonstrated a clear intent to transfer all substantial rights in the invention and patent applications, granting plaintiffs standing to sue for infringement.
-
629 F. Supp. 2d 1293·
M.D. Fla.·
2009-05-05
·cited 2×
The court held that an insurer has standing to bring legal malpractice and breach of contract claims against an attorney hired to represent its insured, as the insurer is considered to be in privity or an intended third-party beneficiary.
-
622 F. Supp. 2d 1357·
S.D. Fla.·
2009-04-22
·cited 2×
The court found that TCG established a substantial likelihood of success on its CFAA claim, warranting a preliminary injunction.
-
615 F. Supp. 2d 1339·
S.D. Fla.·
2009-01-02
·cited 2×
The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding it premature and that collateral estoppel did not apply.
-
The court held that claims challenging Florida's appellate procedures were unripe, and federal constitutional claims for First Amendment retaliation, excessive fines, and due process violations failed to state a claim, leading to dismissal of federal claims and declining suppleme
-
406 F. Supp. 2d 1289·
S.D. Fla.·
2005-12-06
·cited 2×
The CFTC brought an action against G7 Advisory Services for alleged fraud in off-exchange foreign currency transactions, seeking injunctive relief, civil penalties, restitution, and disgorgement. Defendants moved to dismiss arguing the CFTC lacked jurisdiction because the counter
-
The court held that the IRS and its employees are immune from suit for claims related to tax assessment and collection, and that plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
-
150 F. Supp. 2d 1308·
M.D. Fla.·
2001-06-21
·cited 2×
Assistant United States Attorneys are entitled to absolute immunity from suits for money damages based on their performance of advocacy functions in defending the government in civil actions.
-
The court held that it had federal question jurisdiction and supplemental jurisdiction over state claims, but lacked personal jurisdiction over two defendants. The court denied dismissal for most claims but dismissed the mismanagement claim.
-
The court held that the Feres doctrine bars subject matter jurisdiction over a suit brought by a service member injured in an activity incident to service, even if the activity occurred off-base and involved alleged negligence in aircraft maintenance.
-
980 F.2d 84·
2d Cir.·
1992-10-30
·cited 2×
The court affirmed the dismissal of Southview's claims, holding that the denial of a land use permit did not constitute a physical taking, and that regulatory taking and due process claims were not ripe.
-
A magistrate judge lacks the authority to enter a post-judgment order imposing Rule 11 sanctions, as such an order is dispositive and requires de novo review by the district court.
-
958 F.2d 950·
9th Cir.·
1992-03-11
·cited 2×
A possessor of cash seized by the IRS, who is not the owner, lacks standing to seek judicial review of a jeopardy assessment under 26 U.S.C. § 7429.
-
The court held that the Federal Employees Compensation Act's (FECA) exclusive remedy provision barred the plaintiff's claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for injuries already compensated by FECA, and that the Federal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Ac
-
961 F.2d 53·
5th Cir.·
1991-10-29
·cited 2×
The court held that the plaintiff's claims, though framed as torts, were essentially contract claims and thus outside the scope of the Federal Tort Claims Act's waiver of sovereign immunity. The court also held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the claim
-
946 F.2d 196·
3d Cir.·
1991-10-01
·cited 2×
The court held that the plaintiff adequately pled the interstate commerce element necessary to invoke federal jurisdiction under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, and sufficiently alleged a conspiracy and restraint of trade to survive a motion to dismiss.
-
The court held that the district court erred in fact-finding at the jurisdictional stage when those facts were entwined with the merits of the affirmative defense.
-
The court denied motions to dismiss, finding that plaintiffs adequately pleaded claims for RICO violations, antitrust violations, and tortious interference with business relationships, and that defendants were not entitled to sovereign immunity or state action immunity.
-
935 F.2d 544·
2d Cir.·
1991-06-13
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court properly dismissed the wrongful death action because the government's invocation of the state secrets privilege prevented the plaintiff from establishing a prima facie case.
-
920 F.2d 198·
3d Cir.·
1990-12-05
·cited 2×
The court held that a district court may consider facts outside the complaint when ruling on a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, but erred by dismissing on grounds not raised by the moving party without adequate opportunity for the non-moving party to res
-
662 F. Supp. 1525·
S.D. Fla.·
1987-06-24
·cited 2×
The court held that contracts for building or constructing a vessel, including modifications and outfitting done before delivery, are not maritime contracts, thus depriving the court of subject matter jurisdiction in admiralty.