520 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 195 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
819 F.2d 644·
6th Cir.·
1987-05-27
·cited 2×
-
610 F. Supp. 169·
S.D. Fla.·
1985-05-31
·cited 2×
The district court granted the Defendant Committee's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding it lacked authority to entertain challenges to subpoenas issued under the Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act.
-
The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction and that the plaintiff's claim should not have been dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) because prior cases suggest estoppel against FEMA might apply.
-
733 F.2d 258·
2d Cir.·
1984-05-01
·cited 2×
The court held that the village was not required to refund payments made under a state law adopted pursuant to a repealed federal provision, as no federal right to such refunds was created.
-
711 F.2d 8·
2d Cir.·
1983-06-28
·cited 2×
The district court erred in dismissing the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as the claims presented were not "patently without merit."
-
692 F.2d 61·
8th Cir.·
1982-11-04
·cited 2×
The court summarily affirmed the district court's dismissal of most claims, but vacated and remanded one claim for reconsideration.
-
640 F.2d 1024·
9th Cir.·
1981-03-12
·cited 2×
The court held that the statute of limitations for the alleged Truth in Lending Act and Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act violations commenced no later than the date of actual disclosure of the condition, not upon discovery of the violation.
-
The court held that while plaintiffs stated constitutional claims over which it had jurisdiction, they failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on the Hill-Burton Act because they did not allege exhaustion of administrative remedies as required by the statute.
-
619 F.2d 729·
8th Cir.·
1980-04-14
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without adequately determining the substantiality of the constitutional claims.
-
2022 WL 6575784·
S.D. Fla.·
2025-02-04
·cited 1×
The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars claims seeking to relitigate state court judgments, but a breach of contract claim based on alleged contractual obligations arising from silence fails for failure to state a claim.
-
A defendant's removal of its website does not moot an ADA claim if third-party booking sites remain non-compliant and the plaintiff seeks injunctive relief.
-
1989 WL 224896·
S.D. Fla.·
2013-03-18
·cited 1×
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing Count IV for failure to state a claim but denying dismissal for Counts V and VI.
-
725 F. Supp. 2d 1370·
S.D. Fla.·
2010-07-22
·cited 1×
The court held that claims against state agencies (DCA, DEP, City) were not ripe due to lack of a final decision and were barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity for DCA and DEP. Claims against federal defendants were not moot, and mandamus jurisdiction existed for one application.
-
The court held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) bars jurisdiction over the shipwreck and its contents, as they are the property of Spain and not subject to U.S. court adjudication.
-
666 F. Supp. 2d 1285·
M.D. Fla.·
2009-09-30
·cited 1×
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the motion to dismiss as to the attorneys' fee claim and the § 1983 claim, and denying it in all other respects.
-
The court held that Sun Capital, Inc. and Sun Capital Healthcare, Inc. are not proper relief defendants because they possess a legitimate ownership interest in the funds received, precluding dismissal of the complaint against them.
-
The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) claim was barred by sovereign immunity exceptions, specifically the detention of goods and discretionary function exceptions.
-
554 F. Supp. 2d 1321·
M.D. Fla.·
2008-05-08
·cited 1×
The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation, granting the motion to dismiss for lack of actual controversy and personal jurisdiction.
-
A joint venture interest is not a security under federal law if the investor retains significant control or the transaction is a private, one-on-one agreement not intended for public trading.
-
429 F. Supp. 2d 1302·
M.D. Fla.·
2006-04-21
·cited 1×
The court held that Plaintiff Lamb lacks standing to sue because he failed to demonstrate a concrete and specific intent to return to the defendant's facilities, and therefore, Access Now, Inc. also lacks standing.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2004-10-19
·cited 1×
The court held that the case was moot because Volusia County agreed to open additional early voting sites, and there was no reasonable expectation that the county would revert to its previous conduct.
-
323 F. Supp. 2d 1315·
S.D. Fla.·
2004-06-08
·cited 1×
The court held that federal funds received by airlines under the Stabilization Act were compensation for losses, not 'federal financial assistance' under the Rehabilitation Act, thus the Act did not apply.
-
302 F. Supp. 2d 1358·
S.D. Fla.·
2004-01-27
·cited 1×
The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss with prejudice, finding the plaintiff lacked standing and failed to state a claim under the Sherman Act and Communications Act.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs' claims for negligent burial and failure to warn fall under the FTCA's discretionary function exception, thus depriving the court of subject matter jurisdiction.
-
The court held that North Beach failed to comply with FIRREA's claims procedure by not filing a motion to renew its counterclaims within sixty days of the FDIC's disallowance, and therefore, the claims are barred.
-
A district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on the legal insufficiency of a federal claim is improper; such claims should be decided on the merits. A public agency's refusal to pay for housing, even if influenced by bias, does not violate the Fair H
-
972 F.2d 1174·
10th Cir.·
1992-08-17
·cited 1×
The court held that the IRS did not unlawfully disclose tax information by issuing liens and levies, nor by disclosing information to the Colorado Department of Revenue, and that the district court properly dismissed the CDR for lack of jurisdiction.
-
966 F.2d 295·
7th Cir.·
1992-07-02
·cited 1×
The court held that the district court erred in sua sponte granting summary judgment against defendants without affording them a reasonable opportunity to present evidence.
-
968 F.2d 196·
2d Cir.·
1992-06-24
·cited 1×
The court held that a dispute over a loss of goods stored inland, which were never designated for maritime transport, is too attenuated from maritime commerce to fall within admiralty jurisdiction, even if part of a larger marine insurance policy.
-
959 F.2d 1424·
7th Cir.·
1992-04-10
·cited 1×
The court held that a contract dispute between two private defense contractors over a teaming agreement does not implicate a uniquely federal interest sufficient to invoke federal common law jurisdiction.
-
768 F. Supp. 809·
S.D. Fla.·
1991-06-24
·cited 1×
The Clean Water Act and Administrative Procedure Act do not permit pre-enforcement judicial review of Army Corps of Engineers Cease and Desist Orders.
-
The court held that the taxpayer's suit to recover overpaid taxes was timely because the IRS failed to provide sufficient evidence that a waiver of the notice of disallowance was filed, thus the two-year limitations period began from the date of the notice of disallowance.
-
709 F.2d 488·
7th Cir.·
1983-06-17
·cited 1×
The court held that Section 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act does not grant federal courts jurisdiction over suits seeking to determine the validity of a collective bargaining agreement when validity is the ultimate issue.
-
Federal courts may dismiss a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the frivolous claim exception where allegations are wholly insubstantial and frivolous with no plausible foundation, even when a factual attack on jurisdiction is presented. Shaikh's allegations that
-
A passenger injured in a boating accident brought a declaratory judgment action against the boat rental operator's liability insurer, seeking to compel coverage. The court denied the insurer's motion to dismiss, finding that the passenger sufficiently pleaded he was either an int
-
The federal court dismissed the plaintiff's amended complaint, holding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and the prior exclusive jurisdiction doctrine, and that the claims failed to state a plausible legal claim.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish personal jurisdiction and subject-matter jurisdiction, warranting dismissal of the amended complaint.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2026-01-29
The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged Article III standing and stated a plausible claim under the Administrative Procedure Act, denying the defendant's motion to dismiss.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2026-01-16
The court granted the motions to dismiss, finding that the Florida Highway Patrol is immune from suit in federal court under the Eleventh Amendment and that Trooper Rivera is entitled to qualified immunity on the federal claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-12-31
The court recommended dismissal of the breach of insurance policy claim without prejudice because the complaint failed to allege facts supporting the plaintiffs' contractual standing as beneficiaries of the policy, despite the defendant's arguments concerning Article III standing
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-29
The court held that plaintiffs have standing for claims related to generators they purchased, but lacks personal jurisdiction over Generac Holdings and claims by non-Florida plaintiffs.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-12
The court held that the plaintiffs' federal employment claims must be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and the state law claims are dismissed for lack of supplemental jurisdiction.
-
The court denied the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction over the declaratory judgment claim, finding the plaintiff sought monetary damages. However, the court granted the motion to dismiss the declaratory judgment count as duplicative of the fraud claim. Th
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-05
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for default judgment because the plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts to establish subject matter jurisdiction, specifically regarding the amount in controversy.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-04
The court denied the plaintiff's renewed motion for default judgment because the plaintiff failed to address deficiencies in the prior motion regarding the sufficiency of the claims and legal authority. However, the court granted the plaintiff's alternative request for leave to f
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-02
The court held that the amended complaint fails to state a claim for relief due to internal factual inconsistencies and failure to meet statutory or common law requirements for each count. The motion to dismiss for lack of standing was denied.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-02
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and personal jurisdiction over Chase Bank due to improper service, thus dismissing the complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-01
The court held that Younger abstention requires dismissal of claims seeking declaratory and injunctive relief when an ongoing state criminal proceeding implicates important state interests and offers an adequate opportunity for review.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-11-25
The court granted defendants' motions to strike allegations and dismiss all claims, finding them untimely or procedurally barred.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-21
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over a breach of contract claim against FEMA because the state court where the suit was initially filed also lacked jurisdiction, due to exclusive federal jurisdiction provided by statute.