559 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 337 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, granting Plaintiff's motion for default judgment in part and dismissing the remaining claim.
-
2023 WL 5831727·
S.D. Fla.·
2024-11-05
·cited 1×
The court recommended granting in part and denying in part Carnival's motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiff adequately alleged constructive notice of a defective flooring hazard.
-
The court held that a hostile workplace claim fails for lack of pervasive intimidation, but disparate treatment claims regarding discipline and extra hours survive summary judgment, with leave granted to amend the complaint to include omitted factual allegations.
-
595 F. Supp. 2d 1291·
M.D. Fla.·
2009-01-27
·cited 1×
The court held that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants because the alleged tortious acts and resulting injuries occurred in Ohio, not Florida, and the plaintiff's conspiracy allegations were too vague to establish jurisdiction.
-
399 F. Supp. 2d 1320·
M.D. Fla.·
2005-11-10
·cited 1×
The court held that the defendant properly asserted the computer professional exemption defense under the FLSA, and the plaintiff's employment duties and salary met the requirements for this exemption, thus entitling the defendant to summary judgment.
-
39 F. Supp. 2d 1365·
M.D. Fla.·
1999-03-16
·cited 1×
The court granted the motion to dismiss Count IV for intentional infliction of emotional distress, finding the alleged conduct not sufficiently outrageous, and denied the motion to amend to add a battery claim, declining supplemental jurisdiction.
-
998 F.2d 853·
10th Cir.·
1993-07-09
·cited 1×
The court held that a garnishment action against the FDIC is barred by federal statutes (12 U.S.C. §§ 1821(d)(13)(C), 1823(d)(3)(A), and 1825(b)(2)) which prohibit involuntary liens and garnishments against FDIC property without its consent. The court also found no abuse of discr
-
997 F.2d 604·
9th Cir.·
1993-06-30
·cited 1×
The sign codes do not facially violate the First Amendment or state constitutional free speech guarantees, nor do they effect an impermissible taking of property. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint.
-
990 F.2d 1078·
8th Cir.·
1993-04-13
·cited 1×
The court held that the medical malpractice action was barred by the statute of limitations and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying discovery and leave to amend the complaint.
-
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.
-
893 F. Supp. 1057·
S.D. Fla.·
1992-08-13
·cited 1×
The court held that most of the plaintiffs' federal constitutional claims are barred by res judicata and the full faith and credit statute due to prior state court rulings.
-
966 F.2d 1133·
7th Cir.·
1992-07-02
·cited 1×
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting the FDIC leave to amend its complaint, that the amendment related back to the original filing date, and that the FDIC was entitled to the escrowed funds.
-
962 F.2d 1043·
Fed. Cir.·
1992-04-29
·cited 1×
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion to amend its complaint to add the defendant's president as a party, due to undue delay and prejudice.
-
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.
-
958 F.2d 836·
8th Cir.·
1992-03-11
·cited 1×
The court held that summary judgment was prematurely granted before the defendant had adequate opportunity for discovery and that the defendant should be allowed to amend its pleadings to assert a compulsory counterclaim.
-
The court granted dismissal of Count II and the Plan, denied dismissal of Counts I and VI, and granted a stay pending arbitration, finding that while fraudulent concealment was sufficiently pled, misrepresentations regarding employment status were not, and that the arbitration cl
-
The court denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment on patent infringement, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding claim construction and equivalency. The court also denied the defendant's motion to drop parties and motion to strike.
-
The court held that the INS regulation allowing suspension of H-1 visa holders' work authorizations during a strike is an impermissible assumption of legislative power and invalid as applied to H-1 visa holders.
-
535 F. Supp. 667·
M.D. Fla.·
1987-04-17
·cited 1×
The court held that the "forthwith" service requirement under the Suits in Admiralty Act is a procedural requirement superseded by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(j), and that the plaintiff's 24-day delay in service was reasonable and thus "forthwith."
-
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.
-
The court held that a pro se litigant cannot represent others, and the second amended complaint was dismissed as a shotgun pleading, but the plaintiff was granted leave to amend.
-
The court held that claims seeking review of state court custody decisions are barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and the complaint is dismissed as a shotgun pleading, but with leave to amend.
-
The court held that the bankruptcy court correctly denied the motion to amend because the proposed counterclaim was barred by res judicata and issue preclusion, and further, the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction due to a pending appeal.
-
The court held that the City's noise ordinance was not facially unconstitutional and that the plaintiffs failed to state an as-applied claim under the First Amendment or a selective enforcement claim. The court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state la
-
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
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-12-22
A plaintiff seeking to proceed anonymously must provide specific evidence of risks, not just conclusory statements, and must comply with federal pleading rules, including naming parties.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the amended complaint without prejudice, but granted leave to amend.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2025-12-11
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
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-12-09
The court held that dismissal with prejudice for failure to comply with Florida Medical Malpractice Act pre-suit notice requirements is not appropriate if the statute of limitations has not expired, allowing the plaintiff to cure the deficiency. However, the court denied reconsid
-
The court granted in part and denied in part the petitioner's motion, ordering the respondent to provide documents but denying leave to amend the § 2255 motion due to procedural deficiencies.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and must be stricken.
-
The court granted defendants' motions to dismiss the second amended complaint with prejudice and granted the motion to strike the supplemental second amended complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-20
The court held that the Tampa Police Department is not a proper defendant under § 1983 and that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for municipal liability or underlying constitutional violations. However, the pro se plaintiff is granted one final opportunity to amend her compl
-
Pro se plaintiffs filed suit against federal and state officials claiming that the federal government violated the Guarantee Clause by failing to recognize Indigenous Americans as sovereign and that the Fourteenth Amendment's birthright citizenship has been improperly extended to
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-01
The court denied plaintiff's motion for leave to amend to dismiss counts and granted defendant's unopposed motion for summary judgment.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and must be stricken.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to allege facts demonstrating a concrete injury, thus lacking Article III standing to pursue their claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-18
The court held that a second amended complaint filed without leave was properly stricken, and that the plaintiff's allegations of a jail officer using fecal matter on handcuffs stated claims for deliberate indifference and excessive force, thus denying qualified immunity at the m
-
The court denied the plaintiff's renewed motion for leave to amend the complaint because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause for the untimely filing and exceeded the scope of prior court orders.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-09
The court held that the amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and dismissed all claims without prejudice due to insufficient factual allegations and failure to exhaust administrative remedies for some claims.
-
The court held that third-party defendant Claims Direct Access (CDA) was improperly joined and untimely served, warranting dismissal.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the complaint for failing to state a claim and violating procedural rules, but granted leave to amend.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and ordered it stricken.
-
The court held that a motion to vacate a dismissal order and for leave to amend a complaint is denied because the proposed amendment would be futile.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and struck it.
-
The Court holds that the plaintiff's complaint constitutes an impermissible shotgun pleading and strikes it, giving the plaintiff an opportunity to replead.
-
The court denied the defendant's motion to amend its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaim because the motion was filed after the deadline and the defendant failed to show good cause for the delay.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and struck it.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-06-06
The court held that a forum-selection clause in a purchase order agreement, which was not superseded by a subsequent rider agreement for collection matters, is enforceable and requires transfer of venue. The court also denied a motion to amend the complaint, finding it was an att
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-06-04
The court granted plaintiff's motion for leave to amend its verified complaint, finding that amendment would not be futile and that defendants would not suffer undue prejudice.