Heightened Pleading Standard

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

• Elliott v. Leander H. Perez, Jr.
  751 F.2d 1472· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-07 ·cited 139×
  The court holds that a claim against an official enjoying absolute immunity must state sufficient facts to demonstrate the absence of immunity.
• Gonzalez v. Reno
  325 F.3d 1228· 11th Cir.· 2003-03-25 ·cited 102×
  The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court's denial of qualified immunity for former Attorney General Janet Reno, INS Commissioner Doris Meissner, and Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder in a Bivens action arising from the April 22, 2000 seizure of Elian Gonzalez from his g
• Colburn v. Upper Darby Twp.
  838 F.2d 663· 3d Cir.· 1988-01-26 ·cited 88×
  The dissenting judge argues that allegations of gross negligence or deliberate indifference are insufficient to sustain a due process § 1983 claim, which requires pleading intentional action, abuse of power, or actions tantamount to intent.
• Pueblo Neighborhood Health Ctrs., Inc. v. Losavio
  847 F.2d 642· 10th Cir.· 1988-05-24 ·cited 84×
  The court held that the district court applied the wrong standard in denying summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds and that the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence of clearly established law violations or unconstitutional motive.
• Est. OF Aleta v. Bailey
  768 F.2d 503· 3d Cir.· 1985-06-27 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint because the allegations, if proven, could establish a "special relationship" between the child protective services agency and the deceased child, giving rise to an affirmative duty to protect. The court foun
• Jacquez v. R.K. Procunier
  801 F.2d 789· 5th Cir.· 1986-10-10 ·cited 46×
  A plaintiff must plead specific facts demonstrating a violation of clearly established law to overcome a qualified immunity defense and avoid dismissal before discovery.
• Thompson v. Relationserve Media, Inc.
  610 F.3d 628· 11th Cir.· 2010-06-30 ·cited 44×
  L. Alan Jacoby appealed the dismissal of his putative class action alleging that RelationServe Media, Inc. and its directors and employees violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act by failing to disclose that $2,000,000 in stock had been privately offered f
• Fla. Fern Growers Ass'n, Inc. v. Concerned Citizens OF Putnam Cnty.
  616 So. 2d 562· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-04-02 ·cited 39×
  Florida Fern Growers Association sued environmental activists for tortious interference with business relations and conspiracy, alleging the activists filed objections to water permits to drive the fern industry out of business. The trial court dismissed the complaint based on th
• Linville v. Ginn Real Est. Co., LLC
  697 F. Supp. 2d 1302· M.D. Fla.· 2010-03-10 ·cited 34×
  The court granted in part and denied in part the defendant's motion to dismiss, dismissing claims for negligent misrepresentation, fraudulent inducement, and constructive fraud against SunTrust due to insufficient pleading, but allowing a claim for violation of Florida Statute §
• Elliott v. Thomas
  937 F.2d 338· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-15 ·cited 34×
  A defendant's denial of wrongdoing is not a collateral issue and thus not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine; qualified immunity protects officials from trial when the law was not clearly established.
• Frederick A. Siegert, Ph.D. v. H. Melvyn Gilley, Ph.D.
  895 F.2d 797· D.C. Cir.· 1990-02-09 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to meet the heightened pleading standard for claims of unconstitutional motive, and thus the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.
• Hedrick Smith and Ann B. Smith v. Nixon
  807 F.2d 197· D.C. Cir.· 1986-12-05 ·cited 31×
  The court held that plaintiffs failed to meet the heightened pleading standard required to overcome the defendants' qualified immunity defense, as their allegations did not raise a genuine issue as to the objective reasonableness of the national security basis for the wiretap.
• Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited, Inc. v. Timeshare Termination Team, LLC
  294 F.R.D. 668· S.D. Fla.· 2021-09-07 ·cited 30×
  The court held that an affirmative defense must allege personal injury to the defendant and that the defense of unclean hands was insufficient because it focused on harm to other parties. The court also found that the waiver portion of another defense provided fair notice, and th
• Hogan v. Provident Life & Accident Ins.
  665 F. Supp. 2d 1273· M.D. Fla.· 2009-10-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that some claims were sufficiently pled, while others failed to meet pleading standards or were not recognized under Florida law, leading to partial dismissal.
• Moore v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  502 F. Supp. 2d 1224· S.D. Fla.· 2007-07-18 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim against the county under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and that the defendant officers were entitled to qualified immunity due to insufficient factual allegations.
• Caldwell v. City OF Elwood
  959 F.2d 670· 7th Cir.· 1992-04-01 ·cited 16×
  A plaintiff must sufficiently allege that disciplinary action was taken because of constitutionally protected speech and, for municipal liability, must plead a custom or policy, not just a single incident.
• Branch v. Tunnell
  937 F.2d 1382· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-27 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a plaintiff alleging a Fourth Amendment violation based on judicial deception must satisfy a heightened pleading standard, requiring specific, nonconclusory allegations of the defendant's knowing or reckless false statements in the warrant affidavit that were
• Burge v. Ferguson
  619 F. Supp. 2d 1225· M.D. Fla.· 2008-12-16 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged claims for malicious prosecution against Ferguson and a supervisory liability claim against Nieman, but failed to state claims for excessive force and conspiracy against Ferguson and Bowlin.
• Whitacre v. Davey
  890 F.2d 1168· D.C. Cir.· 1989-11-17 ·cited 15×
  A Bivens claim requires a heightened pleading standard beyond the prima facie case established for statutory discrimination claims like Title VII, especially when alleging unconstitutional motive.
• Otto Candies, LLC v. Citigroup Inc.
  137 F.4th 1158· 11th Cir.· 2025-05-08 ·cited 14×
  Otto Candies, LLC and other plaintiffs sued Citigroup for orchestrating a fraudulent scheme involving inflated cash advances to Mexican oil services company Oceanografía that caused over $1 billion in losses to investors. The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court's dismiss
• Leatherman v. Tarrant Cnty. Narcotics Intelligence & Coordination Unit
  954 F.2d 1054· 5th Cir.· 1992-02-28 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the section 1983 claims against the municipalities because the plaintiffs failed to satisfy the circuit's heightened pleading requirement for allegations of inadequate training.
• Rosario v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  490 F. Supp. 2d 1213· S.D. Fla.· 2007-05-08 ·cited 13×
  The court held that plaintiffs failed to state a claim for municipal liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because they did not allege facts sufficient to show that the deprivation of constitutional rights resulted from a final policymaker's decision or an unconstitutional custom or p
• Reese v. Anderson
  926 F.2d 494· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-21 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because the officer's use of deadly force was objectively reasonable under the circumstances, and the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact.
• United States Ex Rel. Heater v. Holy Cross Hosp., Inc.
  510 F. Supp. 2d 1027· S.D. Fla.· 2007-02-15 ·cited 12×
  The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, finding that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded claims under the False Claims Act and Florida False Claims Act.
• Marcus v. Carrasquillo
  782 F. Supp. 593· M.D. Fla.· 1992-01-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that plaintiff's allegations of a racially motivated custom or policy of ignoring complaints were sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss, but First Amendment claims lacked factual support and punitive damages demands were premature.
• Zivojinovich v. Ritz Carlton Hotel Co., LLC
  445 F. Supp. 2d 1337· M.D. Fla.· 2006-08-01 ·cited 11×
  The court held that plaintiffs lacked standing for their loss of business revenue claim and dismissed it, but denied motions to dismiss most other federal and state law claims, including a counterclaim for battery.
• Renay Hunter v. The Dist. OF Columbia
  943 F.2d 69· D.C. Cir.· 1991-08-30 ·cited 11×
  The court held that a plaintiff's § 1983 claim against an individual officer for excessive force, occurring before Graham v. Connor, must meet a heightened pleading standard and be judged against the "clearly established" law at the time, which in this circuit was the Norris stan
• Druskin v. Answerthink, Inc.
  299 F. Supp. 2d 1307· S.D. Fla.· 2004-01-05 ·cited 9×
  The court granted the motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• In re Unicapital Corp. Sec. Litig.
  149 F. Supp. 2d 1353· S.D. Fla.· 2001-06-29 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the amended class action complaint sufficiently alleged material misrepresentations and omissions to state claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act, and that the Individual Defendants could be liable under Section 11 but not directly under S
• Streetman v. Lt. Gary Jordan
  918 F.2d 555· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-07 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the appellant failed to meet the heightened pleading standards required to overcome the qualified immunity defense, thus the district court properly granted summary judgment.
• In re Smith Gardner
  214 F. Supp. 2d 1291· S.D. Fla.· 2002-03-19 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, granting the defendant's motion to dismiss the consolidated amended class action complaint without prejudice.
• King v. Chide
  974 F.2d 653· 5th Cir.· 1992-10-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiff failed to establish a severe injury or that the officers' conduct was grossly disproportionate to the need for action.
• Crawford-El v. Britton
  951 F.2d 1314· D.C. Cir.· 1991-12-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the plaintiff's allegations of intent were sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity, the complaint failed to allege actual injury to his constitutional right of access to the courts, thus not satisfying the heightened plead
• Clark v. State
  995 So. 2d 1112· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-12-03 ·cited 7×
  The postconviction court properly denied the claim regarding failure to preserve evidence because the record conclusively refuted that evidence was collected, but improperly summarily denied the claim regarding newly discovered scientific evidence that allegedly discredited exper
• In re Sportsline.com Securities Litigation
  2004 WL 3316254· S.D. Fla.· 2004-07-19 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' allegations of scienter were insufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA).
• Sinaltrainal v. Coca-Cola Co.
  256 F. Supp. 2d 1345· S.D. Fla.· 2003-03-28 ·cited 7×
  The court granted in part the motion to dismiss, finding subject matter jurisdiction lacking for ATCA claims against Coca-Cola U.S.A. and Coca-Cola Colombia due to the Bottler's Agreement, but found jurisdiction intertwined with the merits for other defendants.
• Or. Natural Res. Council v. Mohla
  944 F.2d 531· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 7×
  The court held that Avison's counterclaims were properly dismissed because ONRC's actions were protected by the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, as Avison failed to meet the heightened pleading standard for the sham exception.
• Andrews v. Wilkins
  934 F.2d 1265· D.C. Cir.· 1991-05-31 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the government was entitled to summary judgment on claims related to the initial chase and failure to rescue, but the dissent argues there was a triable issue of fact regarding the Park Police's interference with a private rescue attempt.
• Colle v. Brazos Cnty.
  981 F.2d 237· 5th Cir.· 1993-01-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the notice of appeal was insufficient to confer jurisdiction over all plaintiffs, but that claims against the county and sheriff were adequately pleaded under § 1983.
• Dunbar Corp. v. Lindsey
  905 F.2d 754· 4th Cir.· 1990-06-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) claim and the Bivens claim, finding that Dunbar had alleged a valid cause of action in trespass under North Carolina law and a constitutionally protected possessory interest for the Bive
• Arnold v. Jones
  891 F.2d 1370· 8th Cir.· 1989-12-21 ·cited 6×
  Unarmed prison officials have no duty as a matter of law to physically intervene in a violent inmate fight that could cause them serious injury or worsen the situation, and are therefore entitled to qualified immunity.
• Mancinelli v. Davis
  217 So. 3d 1034· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-04-05 ·cited 5×
  This case addresses the intra-corporate conspiracy doctrine and its application to civil conspiracy claims. The court held that a corporate CEO cannot conspire with the corporation itself unless the CEO has a personal stake separate from the corporation's interests, but reversed
• Cutsforth v. Renschler
  235 F. Supp. 2d 1216· M.D. Fla.· 2002-09-18 ·cited 5×
  The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint with prejudice.
• Connor v. Halifax Hosp. Med. Ctr.
  135 F. Supp. 2d 1198· M.D. Fla.· 2001-03-05 ·cited 5×
  The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting most motions to dismiss except for the fifth count against Halifax Medical Center Foundation, Inc., and granting plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint.
• Cooper, Jr. v. Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  2019 WL 5304078· M.D. Fla.· 2020-07-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim against the FDOC, Corizon, the officers, and Warden Freeman due to insufficient factual allegations and lack of specificity.
• Blackshear v. City of Miami Beach
  799 F. Supp. 2d 1338· S.D. Fla.· 2011-07-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged claims for illegal search and seizure, malicious prosecution, and false arrest, thus denying the defendants' motions to dismiss.
• In re Pegasus Wireless Corp. Sec. Litig.
  657 F. Supp. 2d 1320· S.D. Fla.· 2009-09-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to plead with particularity facts giving rise to a strong inference that defendant Peraticos acted with scienter, and thus granted his motion to dismiss.
• Schultz v. Applica Inc.
  488 F. Supp. 2d 1219· S.D. Fla.· 2007-02-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while some allegations of scienter were adequately pleaded against Applica and Schulman regarding improper revenue recognition, claims against other defendants and regarding inventory write-downs were dismissed. Certain forward-looking statements were protecte
• In re Sunstar Securities Healthcare Litigation
  173 F. Supp. 2d 1315· M.D. Fla.· 2001-10-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim for securities fraud under the heightened pleading standards of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and further amendment would be futile.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Physicians Guardian Unit Inv. Tr. Ex Rel. Physicians Guardian, Inc.
  72 F. Supp. 2d 1342· M.D. Fla.· 1999-10-29 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the motion to dismiss, finding that the complaint sufficiently alleged fraud with particularity under Rule 9(b) and satisfied the notice pleading requirements of Rule 8.