Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(F) (Motion To Strike)

204 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Thulin v. Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-15
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged physical impact to overcome the impact rule for emotional distress claims and that the challenged paragraphs were relevant and not subject to being stricken.
• Burrs v. Brevard Cnty. Fla.
  2025 WL 1167802· M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-14
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion to strike, finding it improper and unsupported by Rule 12(f) or Rule 11.
• Johnson v. Luminar Techs., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-05-29
  The court held that defendants failed to meet the high standard required to strike an expert report attached to a complaint at the pleading stage.
• 600 Cleveland, LLC v. Bank of Am., N.A.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-04-28
  The court held that a breach of contract counterclaim and a recoupment counterclaim were sufficiently pleaded, but an accounting counterclaim was not. The court also struck one affirmative defense as improper and denied motions to strike others.
• Edelman v. MSC Cruises S.A.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-04-28
  The court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff's motion to strike Defendant's affirmative defenses, striking some as impermissible under maritime law and treating others as mere denials.
• Rothschild v. Kohl's Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-04-23
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction and was inadequately pleaded, warranting dismissal.
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Spine Ctrs. of Am., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-03-21
  State Farm sued healthcare defendants for allegedly operating an unlawful patient brokering scheme in which Spine Centers referred patients to surgeons and surgery centers while submitting inflated bills to insurers that far exceeded what the referred parties actually received, w
• Rabuck v. Pollack & Rosen, PA
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-03-19
  The Court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff's motion to strike Defendant's affirmative defenses, striking only the 'Set Off Defense' as agreed.
• Tynes v. Fla. Dep't of Juv. Just.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-03-12
  The court held that a claim for harassment is redundant to a hostile work environment claim under Title VII when both are based on the same allegations of workplace discrimination and do not involve quid pro quo harassment.
• Colonial Van Lines, Inc. v. Safeway Moving, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-02-11
  The court held that affirmative defenses must provide fair notice of the defense and its grounds, adopting the 'Fair Notice' standard over the 'Twiqbal' heightened pleading standard. Certain defenses were deemed denials or improper, while others lacked sufficient factual support
• Ramindesign, LLC v. Skarzynski
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-01-23
  Ramindesign, LLC contracted with Jacek Skarzynski to plan and develop a luxury home in Miami, but the parties disputed whether Ramindesign had committed material breaches of the contract when payment stopped mid-project. The court recommended denying Ramindesign's motion to strik
• Clouse v. Loan Depot, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-06
  The court held that a motion to strike attorney's fees is premature at the pleading stage and that a plaintiff need not allege personally registering their number on the Do-Not-Call Registry to state a claim under the TCPA.
• Kennedy v. Fla. Home-Improvement Assocs., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-12-05
  The court denied the defendant's motion to strike class allegations, finding them not redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous.
• Reyes v. Fla. A&M Univ. Bd. of Trs.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-09
  The Court denied the Defendant's motion to dismiss and motion to strike, finding that despite its length and some deficiencies, the Second Amended Complaint provided adequate notice of the Plaintiff's claims.
• XYZ Corp. v. The Individuals
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-08-12
  The court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff's motion, striking some affirmative defenses and dismissing one counterclaim for insufficient pleading of fraud and intent.
• Bryan v. City of Orlando
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-07
  The court denied the plaintiffs' motion to strike the defendant's answer and affirmative defenses.
• XYZ Corp. v. The Individuals
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-08-05
  The court held that the notice pleading standard applies to affirmative defenses and granted in part and denied in part the motion to strike.
• Nord Hodges v. Passidomo
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-16
  The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to strike affirmative defenses, treating some as specific denials but otherwise denying the motion.
• Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-07-02
  The court held that the claimant's statement of claims sufficiently alleged notice of dangerous conditions and that the claims for vicarious liability, negligent training, and negligent entrustment were not duplicative, thus denying the motion to dismiss. The court also denied th
• Cmty. Health Ctrs., Inc. v. DiamondDog Servs., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-02
  The court held that the Copyright Act preempts the FDUTPA claim, and the claim also fails to plead consumer injury and actual damages, but granted leave to amend.
• Askan v. Faro Techs., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-06-26
  The court held that a motion to strike is not a substitute for a response to a motion to dismiss, and infringement contentions cannot be used to supplement a deficient complaint.
• Lalusis v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-06-26
  The court held that the defendant's Thirteenth Affirmative Defense, asserting limitations of liability under the Athens Convention, was legally sufficient and should not be stricken.
• Doe K.R. v. Choice Hotels
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-06-12
  A woman alleged she was a victim of sex trafficking at a Choice Hotels franchised property in Orlando, Florida for approximately three months in 2013, and brought claims under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act against both the hotel owner/operator and the fra
• Accelerant Specialty Ins. Co. v. Z & G Boat & Jet Ski Rentals, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-06-11
  The court denied the motion to dismiss Count I of the counterclaim but granted the motion to strike the demand for a jury trial and attorney's fees.
• Moore v. Adventist Health Sys. Sunbelt Healthcare Corp.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-05-30
  The court denied plaintiff's motions for default judgment and to strike defendant's answer and affirmative defenses, finding the late filing was due to excusable neglect and the affirmative defenses were not sufficiently challenged.
• Lopez v. Consumer Safety Tech. LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-05-10
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged violations of the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act and that the class allegations were not grounds for dismissal or striking at this early stage.
• Final Expense Direct v. Python Leads, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-26
  The court held that defendants' claims for attorneys' fees, reputational damages, and loss of customers were properly stricken as they were not recoverable under the alleged facts.
• Percival v. Leduc
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-08
  Diana Percival sued a county sheriff and two deputies after they assisted her ex-boyfriend in entering her home without a warrant or valid consent and subsequently arrested her following a physical altercation. The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motions
• Kazak and Kazak Real Estate v. Truist
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-07
  The court held that affirmative defenses should not be stricken as they provide fair notice and are not facially insufficient as a matter of law.
• Dimanche v. Jackson
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-13
  The court denied the plaintiff's motions for default judgment, clerk's default, and to strike the defendant's pleading, finding them procedurally deficient and substantively unwarranted.
• Jackson v. Alto Experience, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-02-12
  Willie Mae Jackson, a hearing-impaired woman, was terminated from her job as a driver for rideshare company Alto Experience, Inc. nine days after beginning employment because she could not use the company's required in-ear headset due to her hearing aid, despite offering a Blueto
• Truesdale v. Venice Arms, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-01-27
  The court held that the amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and failed to state claims under the Fair Housing Act, dismissing all counts with leave to amend.
• The Descartes Sys. Grp., Inc. v. Descartes Labs, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-18
  The court held that the heightened pleading standards of Iqbal and Twombly do not apply to affirmative defenses, and absent specific objections or prejudice, defenses will not be stricken.
• Chestnut v. Williams
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-18
  The court held that Plaintiff failed to state a plausible conspiracy claim against the nurse defendants, but denied the motion to strike and found Plaintiff had exhausted administrative remedies for the conspiracy claim.
• Briggs v. City of Daytona Beach
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-10-23
  The court held that affirmative defenses need only provide notice under Rule 8(c) and are generally not stricken if they can be clarified through discovery or are treated as denials.
• Trapenard v. Clester
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-09-22
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for default judgment against all defendants because the motion failed to address prior court orders and contained numerous deficiencies in pleading and proof.
• McMahon v. Orange Cnty.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-08-31
  The court held that an affirmative defense alleging a failure to state a claim is insufficient as a matter of law and must be stricken, but other affirmative defenses providing fair notice are sufficient.
• KPR U.S., LLC v. LifeSync Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-08-27
  In this patent infringement case involving electrocardiogram electrode lead wire connectors, the court dismissed the defendant's counterclaims alleging that the patents were procured through the original patentee's inequitable conduct before the USPTO, finding that the defendant
• Morris v. Lincare, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-08-18
  The court dismissed the amended complaint as a shotgun pleading but denied the motion to dismiss and strike without prejudice, granting leave to amend.
• Alcott v. Centurion of Fla., LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-08-02
  The court granted the motion to dismiss Count XIII (deliberate indifference against Dr. Hasty) but denied the motion to dismiss claims against Centurion. The court also granted in part and denied in part the motion to strike affirmative defenses, striking one.
• Local Access, LLC v. Peerless Network, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-07-28
  The court held that motions to strike affirmative defenses are granted in part and denied in part, striking some defenses, treating others as denials, and denying motions to strike for others.
• Basf Corp. v. USA Coach LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-07-19
  The court held that the plaintiff adequately pleaded claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgment, but the request for attorney's fees was properly stricken due to lack of legal basis.
• Pirate Water Taxi, LLC v. Tampa Water Taxi Co. LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-07-14
  The court held that the plaintiffs stated plausible claims for declaratory and injunctive relief, but their requests for statutory damages and attorney's fees were not authorized by the relevant statutes and were therefore stricken.
• Mount v. Am's. Insured, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-07-11
  The court affirmed a judgment for the insured, holding that the insurer failed to meet its burden of proving that the loss of jewelry by theft occurred in a single occurrence, thus the $500 per-occurrence limit did not apply.
• Shed v. Univ. of S. Fla. Bd. of Trs.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-07-10
  The court held that most of the plaintiff's claims failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, with only one claim surviving dismissal.
• Victor v. Everest Receivable Servs., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-06-30
  The court held that a motion to strike affirmative defenses should be denied if the defenses, even if not strictly affirmative, provide notice of issues the defendant intends to raise or are akin to a denial.
• Am. Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Fortun
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-06-28
  The court held that affirmative defenses which merely deny allegations or point to a lack of evidence in the plaintiff's case are insufficient and should be stricken, while defenses that raise substantial legal and factual questions may survive.
• Collado v. 450 N. River Drive, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-06-21
  The court held that defendants' motion to dismiss was procedurally improper for filing a second Rule 12 motion, and their motion to strike was denied because the challenged allegations were not redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous.
• Keegan v. Minahan
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-06-07
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to plead common law fraud with the requisite particularity under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b), warranting dismissal.
• Peavy v. Carnival Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-05-12
  The court held that Count I of the amended complaint impermissibly commingles vicarious and direct liability allegations and is dismissed without prejudice, while other claims and allegations regarding notice are sufficient.