Heightened Pleading Standard

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

• In re Physician Corp. of Am. Sec. Litig.
  50 F. Supp. 2d 1304· S.D. Fla.· 1999-02-18 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss the consolidated and amended complaint, finding that the plaintiffs had sufficiently pleaded claims for violations of securities laws.
• Denno Ex Rel. Denno v. Sch. Bd. of Volusia Cnty.
  959 F. Supp. 1481· M.D. Fla.· 1997-02-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while a heightened pleading standard does not apply to § 1983 claims against local governments, it does apply to claims against individual officials in their individual capacities, and that the plaintiff failed to allege a clearly established constitutional ri
• Jackson v. City OF Beaumont Police Dep't
  958 F.2d 616· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the officers' Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss by improperly conflating the standards for dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d), and that the plaintiff failed to meet the heightened pleading requirements for q
• Vargas v. Lincare, Inc.
  134 F.4th 1150· 11th Cir.· 2025-04-16 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the relators sufficiently pleaded the battery upcoding scheme with particularity to survive a motion to dismiss, but their other claims failed to meet the heightened pleading standard.
• Blatt v. Goldner
  2011 WL 13108060· S.D. Fla.· 2024-08-21 ·cited 3×
  Plaintiff Eli Blatt sued his business partner Marc Goldner and related parties after Goldner allegedly misrepresented his business prospects and failed to properly title and assign cryptocurrency assets (NFTs and bitcoin miners) purchased with Blatt's funds to their jointly-owned
• Sanabria v. Pennymac Mortg. Inv. Tr. Holdings I, LLC
  197 So. 3d 94· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-07-15 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed a foreclosure judgment because the trial court erroneously excluded evidence that the homeowners had adequately pleaded an affirmative defense challenging the authenticity of the homeowner's signature on the promissory note. Th
• City of Fort Lauderdale v. Scott
  773 F. Supp. 2d 1355· S.D. Fla.· 2011-02-28 ·cited 3×
  The court granted the motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, finding some claims inadequately pleaded and others barred by sovereign immunity or procedural rules, but granted leave to amend.
• In re Winn-Dixie Stores
  531 F. Supp. 2d 1334· M.D. Fla.· 2007-12-04 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the consolidated complaint failed to state a claim for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 because it did not sufficiently allege material misstatements or omissions with the required particularity.
• In re Miva, Inc.
  511 F. Supp. 2d 1242· M.D. Fla.· 2007-07-17 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to plead with particularity that the defendants made false or misleading statements with the required scienter, thus dismissing the securities fraud claims.
• In re CP Ships Ltd.
  506 F. Supp. 2d 1161· M.D. Fla.· 2007-04-06 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to plead scienter with the particularity required by the PSLRA, thus granting the motion to dismiss.
• In re Sinaltrainal Litigation
  474 F. Supp. 2d 1273· S.D. Fla.· 2006-09-29 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' allegations were too conclusory, vague, and attenuated to adequately plead a violation of the law of nations, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Claims Act.
• Walker v. Prieto
  414 F. Supp. 2d 1148· S.D. Fla.· 2006-02-03 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiff failed to allege facts showing a violation of a clearly established constitutional right, and the state law claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
• In re Eagle Bldg. Techs., Inc.
  319 F. Supp. 2d 1318· S.D. Fla.· 2004-01-22 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Second Amended Class Action Complaint adequately pled scienter, allowing the securities fraud claims against Tanner to proceed.
• Cannon v. Lindsey
  243 F. Supp. 2d 1339· M.D. Fla.· 2003-01-14 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss stage because the plaintiff adequately pleaded a constitutional violation of a clearly established right, and the statute of limitations issue is not ripe for resolution.
• Gainer v. City of Winter Haven
  170 F. Supp. 2d 1225· M.D. Fla.· 2001-06-13 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' First Amendment claims failed because their speech was not a matter of public concern or did not play a substantial part in their termination, and their procedural due process claims failed due to adequate state remedies.
• Ehlert v. Singer
  85 F. Supp. 2d 1269· M.D. Fla.· 1999-12-16 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims under Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Exchange Act, and control person liability claims were dismissed because the statements in the prospectus were forward-looking and accompanied by adequate cautionary langua
• Andre v. Castor
  963 F. Supp. 1158· M.D. Fla.· 1997-03-27 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged claims for First and Fourth Amendment violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and that certain defendants' actions could constitute causation, but dismissed claims against two defendants for lack of specific allegations.
• Aquilo v. Cognizant Tech. Solutions U.S. Corp.
  540 F. Supp. 3d 1129· M.D. Fla.· 2022-06-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims for fraudulent concealment and fraudulent misrepresentation fail because they do not meet the heightened pleading standards of Rule 9(b) and lack sufficient factual allegations. The court also noted that Florida law does not recognize me
• In re Noven Pharms.
  238 F. Supp. 2d 1315· S.D. Fla.· 2002-12-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to plead with sufficient particularity facts giving rise to a strong inference that the defendants had actual knowledge of the falsity of their statements, thus the PSLRA safe harbor applied and the complaint was dismissed.
• Fla. Country Clubs, Inc. v. Carlton
  98 F. Supp. 2d 1356· M.D. Fla.· 2000-05-23 ·cited 2×
  The court found that the plaintiffs failed to allege sufficient facts to establish state action by Carlton Fields, a private entity, and therefore could not proceed with their Section 1983 claim against them. Motions related to Partyka were denied as moot due to a settlement.
• Gainor v. Rogers
  973 F.2d 1379· 8th Cir.· 1992-08-20 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge would grant qualified immunity on unlawful arrest and First Amendment claims and remand the excessive force claim for further consideration.
• Aclu Found. OF S. Cal. v. Barr
  952 F.2d 457· D.C. Cir.· 1991-12-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that claims regarding past FISA surveillance, previously determined lawful in an ex parte proceeding under 50 U.S.C. § 1806(f), are barred. Claims of ongoing surveillance were dismissed for failing to state a claim with sufficient specificity.
• Sawyer v. Cnty. OF Creek
  908 F.2d 663· 10th Cir.· 1990-07-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts to overcome the defendant's qualified immunity defense, as the complaint did not demonstrate deliberate indifference to the decedent's serious medical needs.
• Recreational Design & Constr., Inc. v. Wiss
  820 F. Supp. 2d 1293· S.D. Fla.· 2011-01-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for professional malpractice or negligent misrepresentation because the allegations did not establish a duty owed by the defendants to the plaintiff, nor did they sufficiently plead breach, causation, or justifiable relian
• Oglesbee v. Indymac Fin. Servs., Inc.
  686 F. Supp. 2d 1313· S.D. Fla.· 2010-02-08 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead fraud, a Florida RICO violation, and a claim against MERS, granting the defendants' motion to dismiss.
• Keating v. City of Miami
  598 F. Supp. 2d 1315· S.D. Fla.· 2009-01-20 ·cited 1×
  The court held that plaintiffs sufficiently alleged Monell claims against municipalities and Fourth Amendment seizure claims based on police 'herding' tactics.
• In re Paradyne Networks
  197 F. Supp. 2d 1349· M.D. Fla.· 2002-04-02 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiffs adequately pled claims under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act, as well as Section 20(a) against the individual defendants, and thus denied the motion to dismiss.
• Sherleigh Assocs., LLC v. Windmere-Durable Holdings, Inc.
  178 F. Supp. 2d 1255· S.D. Fla.· 2000-06-08 ·cited 1×
  The court denied the Windmere Defendants' motion to dismiss in its entirety and granted Montgomery's motion to dismiss Count IV, denying it in all other respects.
• Hornfeld v. City of N. Miami Beach
  29 F. Supp. 2d 1357· S.D. Fla.· 1998-11-09 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) does not preclude a plaintiff from bringing a concurrent claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Anderson v. Dist. of Columbia Pub. Def. Serv.
  980 F.2d 746· D.C. Cir.· 1992-11-16 ·cited 1×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of claims against the Office of the Bar Counsel but vacated the dismissal of claims against Buchanan and DiFonzo, remanding for further proceedings.
• Bensch v. Metro. Dade Cnty.
  798 F. Supp. 678· S.D. Fla.· 1992-05-04 ·cited 1×
  The court held that John Maloy is entitled to qualified immunity and dismissed claims against him, but denied dismissal for SFWMD's flood-taking claim, while dismissing other claims against SFWMD for failure to plead adequately.
• Delivery Kick Holdings, Inc. v. RJ Brooksher LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-31
  The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, allowing the breach of contract claim to proceed but dismissing the conversion and fraud claims.
• Herrera v. Grove Bay Hospitality Grp., LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-12-19
  The court held that Grove Bay's third-party complaint against Popmenu failed to state claims for common law indemnity, negligent misrepresentation, and violation of FDUPTA due to lack of specific allegations and enforceable contract terms.
• Mickens v. Cir. Court Second Jud. Cir.
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-11-25
  The court held that the amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and failed to state claims under Rule 9(b), Sections 1981, 1983, 1985, and Title VII, warranting dismissal.
• Nate M. Landis v. Quantum Cap. Global, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-11-04
  The court held that plaintiff's allegations sufficiently stated claims for fraud, fraudulent misrepresentation, civil theft, violation of FDUPTA, and violation of Florida Statute § 817.41, but failed to adequately plead breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment.
• Publix Litig. P'ship, LLP v. Publix Super Mkts., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-08-27
  The court held that the second amended complaint failed to adequately plead a viable corporate-wide False Claims Act claim, particularly regarding the requirement of alleging actual false claims and providing specific representative examples.
• Fleischman v. Forest Trail Acad., LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-08-22
  A parent sued Forest Trail Academy and United Secure Youth Transport Agency (USYTA) for negligence, fraud, conspiracy, and human trafficking violations arising from the alleged abuse and exploitation of her autistic son and other children at a boarding school in Jamaica operated
• Lewitter v. Terran Orbital Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-08-21
  Investors in Terran Orbital Corporation sued the company and four executives for securities fraud, alleging false and misleading statements regarding the company's cash reserves and revenue prospects during the Class Period from March 2023 through August 2024, when the company wa
• Malhotra v. Kumar
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-08-19
  The court granted the motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiff failed to state claims for fraudulent misrepresentation, fraud, civil conspiracy, and invalidity of a sales deed, and improperly added an unjust enrichment claim.
• De Larrea v. Golden Yacht Charters, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-08-18
  The court recommended granting in part and denying in part the motion to strike affirmative defenses, treating some as denials and upholding others.
• MCM Ent., Inc. v. Diaz World Trade Grp., Inc
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-07-29
  The court recommended granting the motion to dismiss Counterclaim V (fraud in the inducement) but denying the motion to dismiss Counterclaims III (unjust enrichment) and IV (breach of fiduciary duties).
• Sedona P'rs LLC v. Able Moving & Storage Inc.
  11th Cir.· 2025-07-25
  The court held that allegations derived from discovery materials can satisfy the heightened pleading standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) at the motion-to-dismiss stage.
• Monterroso Romero v. Agent Au Pair, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-24
  The court recommended granting in part and denying in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing claims for negligent misrepresentation, innkeeper's duty, and joint venture, but allowing claims for sexual battery, false imprisonment, and violation of the Trafficking Victims Protectio
• Skye Energy Ventures LLC v. Hollander
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-30
  The court held that Plaintiff failed to state claims for federal and Florida RICO, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty due to pleading deficiencies, but negligence and conversion claims survive because the Payment Services Agreements
• Babieca Cap., LP v. Cohen Anytime, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-05-23
  The court granted in part and denied in part the motions to dismiss, finding it had jurisdiction and that the litigation privilege was inapplicable, while dismissing some claims with leave to amend.
• Coast Pump & Supply Co., Inc. v. Franklin Elec. Co., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-05-13
  The court held that the fraudulent inducement claim failed to meet Rule 9(b)'s heightened pleading standard and the FDUPTA claim failed to allege consumer injury and actual damages.
• Prime Ins. Co. v. Medicab Transp., LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-04-23
  The court denied motions to dismiss, finding that the amended counterclaim and third-party complaint did not constitute shotgun pleading and sufficiently stated claims under Rule 9(b) for fraud and other torts, and that a case and controversy existed.
• Boom Funded, LLC v. Aeva, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-03-11
  The court held that affirmative defenses directed at unpled claims or that are merely conclusory should be stricken, while those that function as denials should be treated as such rather than stricken.
• Hernandez v. Stingray Digit. Grp. Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-03-04
  Dr. Hernandez and his company EGLA alleged that Stingray Digital Group and related defendants misappropriated proprietary audio and video technology, trade secrets, and patents developed by Dr. Hernandez, and that Stingray gained unauthorized access to this technology after acqui
• Joseph v. Gen. Conf. Corp. of 7th Day Adventist
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-02-26
  Plaintiff Lorfils Joseph filed a lawsuit against the General Conference Corporation of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in federal district court in Florida. The court granted Joseph's request to proceed without paying court fees and costs, issued summonses for the defendants, an