559 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 337 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
The court denied Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend its complaint to add a party defendant because the motion was filed after the deadline and Plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause or diligence.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and failed to comply with procedural requirements for injunctive relief.
-
The Court held that the Complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and ordered Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint correcting the identified deficiencies.
-
The court granted the defendant's motion for leave to amend its answer to add the affirmative defense of prior express consent.
-
Havana Docks Corporation, a U.S. national holding a Foreign Claims Settlement Commission-certified claim to property in Havana, Cuba confiscated by the Cuban Government in 1960, sued Royal Caribbean Cruises under Title III of the Helms-Burton Act (LIBERTAD Act) alleging that Roya
-
The court held that the amended complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and failed to state a claim under ERISA or Florida Statute 641.513, warranting dismissal.
-
The court held that the amended complaint failed to state sufficient factual allegations for FLSA claims and that state law claims would be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction after federal claims were dismissed.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-03-19
Contractual jury trial waivers are enforceable in Fair Housing Act claims if knowing and voluntary, and the waiver in the lease agreement was valid.
-
The Court held that the plaintiff's complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and must be stricken.
-
The court held that leave to amend a complaint should be denied if the amendment would be futile.
-
The court held that the petitioner's objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation were overruled on the merits, and that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel failed to establish deficient performance or prejudice.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the complaint because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause for the late filing after the scheduling order deadline had passed.
-
The court granted the motion to amend the attorney's fees motion and denied the motion for reconsideration as moot.
-
The court granted the defendant's motion for leave to amend its answer and affirmative defenses, finding good cause for the untimely filing and that the proposed amendments were neither futile nor inadequately pled.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-02-11
The court held that plaintiffs failed to establish good cause for leave to amend their complaint after the deadline, and thus their motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of their RICO claim was denied.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-02-10
The district court properly granted the defendants' motion to dismiss and dismissed the plaintiff's complaint with prejudice. The plaintiff's objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation were untimely and failed to raise new arguments. The court found that the j
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to reconsider its prior summary judgment order and denied her motion for leave to amend her complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-01-30
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under the NDAA and that her amended complaints were improperly filed, warranting dismissal.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and that her request to amend was untimely and lacked good cause, warranting dismissal.
-
The court granted the plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint.
-
The Seminole Tribe of Florida is entitled to tribal sovereign immunity, and thus dismissed from the action. Claims involving internal church governance are non-justiciable.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend its complaint and answer because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause or diligence after the deadline for amendments had passed.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under Section 1983 because he did not allege facts showing a deprivation of a constitutional right or municipal liability.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2019-11-26
The court held that a non-diverse defendant added after removal will not be joined if the primary purpose is to defeat federal jurisdiction and the plaintiffs were dilatory.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and must be stricken.
-
The Court strikes the Complaint because it constitutes an impermissible shotgun pleading and orders Plaintiff to file an amended complaint.
-
The court held that a plaintiff must show good cause to amend a complaint after a scheduling order deadline has passed, and that seeking to amend only after a magistrate judge's report and recommendation is not sufficient diligence.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-10-11
The court held that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate good cause for seeking a third amendment to their complaint after the deadline had passed.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-10-04
The court held that the defendant failed to show good cause to amend the scheduling order to file a third-party complaint.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-09-16
The court held that a private citizen lacks standing to bring criminal charges, and thus, the amended complaint alleging violations of criminal statutes must be dismissed.
-
The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiff's motion, vacating the default judgment and dismissing the defendant without prejudice, but denying the request to reopen the case and amend the complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2019-09-05
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate excusable neglect or good cause for seeking to amend their complaint after the deadline, and that allowing the amendment would cause undue prejudice to the defendant.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's motion to amend was denied for failure to show good cause, the § 1983 claims against the Sheriff were dismissed for failure to state a claim, and supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims was declined.
-
The court granted plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend their complaint, finding that the proposed amendments were not futile and that justice required allowing the amendments.
-
849 F. Supp. 2d 1190·
S.D. Fla.·
2013-12-30
The court held that the plaintiff lacked standing to challenge the city's zoning ordinance definition of 'adult entertainment establishment' because it failed to demonstrate an actual or imminent injury, redressability, or traceability. Consequently, the court declined supplement
-
840 F. Supp. 2d 873·
M.D. Fla.·
2013-11-05
The court held that the insurance policy did not cover attorney's fees incurred by the insured as a result of lawsuits the insured initiated, as the policy was designed to cover claims made *against* the insured, not claims initiated *by* the insured.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint to add a non-diverse party because the primary purpose appeared to be defeating diversity jurisdiction, and the plaintiff had been dilatory and would not be significantly prejudiced.
-
The court held that a plaintiff's motion to amend a complaint to add a non-diverse defendant after removal, for the purpose of destroying diversity jurisdiction, should be denied when the plaintiff was dilatory and will not be significantly prejudiced by the denial.
-
248 F.R.D. 319·
M.D. Fla.·
2013-02-04
The court held that the plaintiff's counsel failed to demonstrate excusable neglect for the late filing of a motion to substitute a party after the plaintiff's death, and thus the action was properly dismissed.
-
1992 WL 114785·
S.D. Fla.·
2012-11-30
-
The court granted defendants' motion for leave to amend their answer to correct a scrivener's error, finding good cause under Rule 16(b) and that justice required leave under Rule 15(a)(2).
-
The Court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss, finding that the Amended Stipulation effectively tolled the statute of limitations for the plaintiff's claims. The Court held that the trustee's failure to support the proposed settlement did not constitute a breach of the stipu
-
1962 Trade Cas. (CCH) 70,221·
S.D. Fla.·
2008-07-22
The court held that the plaintiff could not amend the complaint to join additional defendants because their alleged conduct arose from separate transactions or occurrences.
-
1997 WL 336566·
S.D. Fla.·
2007-08-10
The court denied the defendants' motion to amend their pleadings because they failed to demonstrate good cause for the untimely filing after the scheduling order deadline had passed.
-
192 F.R.D. 552·
M.D. Fla.·
2007-03-06
The court held that the amended complaint substituting a successor entity as plaintiff relates back to the original filing date, and thus the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of standing is denied.
-
190 F.R.D. 5·
S.D. Fla.·
2006-08-17
The court denied plaintiffs' motions to appoint new lead plaintiffs and to file a fourth amended complaint, finding the actions were for undue delay and dilatory motive, and would prejudice the defendants.
-
200 F.R.D. 572·
N.D. Fla.·
2006-04-14
-
184 F.R.D. 363·
S.D. Fla.·
2005-09-25
The court held that improper service of process renders a default judgment void and deprives the court of personal jurisdiction, requiring vacation of the default and dismissal of the complaint.
-
368 F. Supp. 2d 1290·
M.D. Fla.·
2005-05-04
The court held that punitive damages are not available under the Copyright Act, making the proposed amendment futile.
-
357 F. Supp. 2d 1346·
M.D. Fla.·
2005-01-24
Leave to amend a complaint should be denied if the proposed amendment would be futile. Futility exists when the amendment cannot possibly succeed, such as when the claim is barred by statute or lacks a legal basis.