880 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 130 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
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.
-
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.·
2022-04-12
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.·
2022-03-31
An attorney representing a medical provider sued an opposing counsel and their law firm, claiming they violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by filing a state court action based on a doctor's lien to collect alleged unpaid medical bills. The court granted summar
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-03-29
The court held that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) does not completely preempt state law claims, and therefore, removal based on federal question jurisdiction was improper when the complaint only alleged state law claims.
-
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.
-
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.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-11-18
The court granted the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis but struck the complaint because it failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction.
-
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.
-
Federal habeas relief is available only for constitutional violations, not state law errors, and claims not properly presented to state courts are procedurally barred unless cause and prejudice or manifest injustice is shown.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-09-27
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over claims challenging tax assessments and collections due to sovereign immunity and statutory bars, and that a claim regarding a 'seriously delinquent tax debt' certification failed to state a claim.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-07-20
The court held that the defendant's allegations regarding the plaintiff's citizenship were insufficient to establish diversity jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-07-17
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff's claims arose under state law and the amount in controversy did not meet the statutory threshold for diversity jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-07-07
A federal court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims when all federal claims have been dismissed, especially when the remaining claims are best suited for a state court.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-07-06
The court held that the defendants' removal of the case was untimely because the plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint provided sufficient information to ascertain removability more than 30 days prior to removal.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-06-30
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction after the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed all federal claims, requiring remand to state court.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-04-28
The Court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim and lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, warranting dismissal without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-16
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was insufficient to establish subject matter jurisdiction because it failed to plausibly allege the amount in controversy.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-01
The court is not inclined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claim and orders parties to show cause why the case should not be remanded.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-01-13
The court dismissed the case because it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred review of the state court's judgment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-29
The court held that the complaint must be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and because abstention principles apply.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-22
The district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review claims challenging an alien's removal order or the proceedings leading to it, as these are exclusively vested in the courts of appeals under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-10
The district court held it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review the petitioner's challenge to a final order of removal, as such review is exclusively vested in the court of appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-12-01
The court held that the Governor's consent to removal was timely, and federal question jurisdiction existed, thus denying the motions to remand.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-01
The court held that removal to federal court was improper because the plaintiff's amended complaint did not establish federal question or diversity jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-10-22
The court held that the arbitration clause in the agreements is valid and enforceable under the New York Convention, requiring the plaintiff to arbitrate his claims.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were unexhausted, procedurally defaulted, or not cognizable on federal habeas review.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-02-28
The court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that the dispute likely arose in connection with the business activities of the associated person and that the definition of 'customer' under FINRA rules is broad.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-01-29
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint, while alleging plausible Title VII claims, was dismissed without prejudice because it failed to properly establish federal question jurisdiction and lacked clarity regarding procedural prerequisites and party identification, requirin
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-01-14
The court held that venue for a breach of contract claim against a Write Your Own (WYO) flood insurance company is governed by 42 U.S.C. § 4072, requiring the suit to be filed in the district where the insured property is located.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2019-12-04
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a temporary injunction because it failed to comply with procedural rules and lacked federal subject matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-10-31
The Court dismissed the case without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to allege a basis for federal jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-09-25
The court dismissed the case because the complaint failed to state a claim and lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-09-04
The court held that a removing defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy, including attorney's fees, exceeds the jurisdictional threshold at the time of removal, and prospective fees are too speculative.
-
117 La. 561·
M.D. Fla.·
2019-02-15
The court held that removal was improper because the Medicare Act does not grant federal courts original federal-question jurisdiction over claims arising under it, and the defendant, a Medicare Advantage Organization, did not act under the control of a federal officer for remova
-
Fla. 5th DCA·
2018-10-15
Section 1367(d) tolls the statute of limitations for state law claims dismissed in federal court, regardless of whether the federal claims were frivolous or lacked subject matter jurisdiction, provided the state claims were asserted under supplemental jurisdiction and refiled wit
-
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133884·
S.D. Fla.·
2015-09-23
The court held that general maritime claims and Jones Act claims are not removable to federal court without an independent basis for jurisdiction, even after the 2011 amendment to 28 U.S.C. § 1441.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2015-02-11
The court held that transfer of the action to the District of Columbia is warranted for the convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice, as the operative facts and governing law are centered there.
-
311 F. Supp. 2d 14·
S.D. Fla.·
2012-11-09
The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the debt collector's calls constituted harassment under FDCPA §§ 1692d and 1692d(5), but granted summary judgment on the claim under § 1692c(a)(2) because the collector did not have knowledge of the debto
-
801 F. Supp. 2d 1344·
M.D. Fla.·
2011-08-02
The court held that the agency's denial of EAD applications was not arbitrary or capricious, and thus granted the motion to dismiss.
-
721 F. Supp. 2d 1201·
M.D. Fla.·
2010-06-14
The court held that while some claims must be arbitrated under the New York Convention, Jones Act claims cannot be compelled to arbitration due to prospective waiver of statutory rights.
-
707 F. Supp. 2d 1351·
S.D. Fla.·
2010-04-26
The rule of unanimity, requiring all defendants to join in a removal notice, does not apply to actions removed under 12 U.S.C. § 632, a special removal statute.
-
605 F. Supp. 2d 1230·
M.D. Fla.·
2009-03-16
The court held that a federal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a state law bill of discovery absent an independent basis for federal jurisdiction.
-
564 F. Supp. 2d 1357·
S.D. Fla.·
2008-07-11
The court held that a defendant's failure to timely and bindingly manifest consent to removal, despite oral or email assurances, warrants remand.
-
545 F. Supp. 2d 1225·
N.D. Fla.·
2008-03-12
The court held that the "grandfather rules" for flood insurance only allow policyholders to pay lower premiums based on prior flood zone classifications, not to have flood losses adjusted under those prior classifications. Equitable estoppel is generally unavailable against the g
-
496 F. Supp. 2d 1330·
M.D. Fla.·
2007-07-10
The court held that the failure to conduct mandatory five-year status reviews under the Endangered Species Act is an agency action unlawfully withheld, reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act, and that the ESA's citizen-suit provision does not preclude APA review.
-
447 F. Supp. 2d 1307·
S.D. Fla.·
2006-08-14
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiffs' state law contract claim did not present a substantial and disputed federal question necessary for federal court adjudication under the Grable test.