Implied Preemption

133 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Begley v. Philadelphia Elec. Co.
  760 F.2d 46· 3d Cir.· 1985-04-19 ·cited 8×
  Section 366 of the Bankruptcy Code does not preempt state public utility regulations requiring an opportunity to amortize post-petition arrearages before termination of service in a Chapter 7 proceeding.
• 770 PPR, LLC v. TJCV Land Tr.
  30 So. 3d 613· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-03-10 ·cited 7×
  A national bank foreclosed on mortgages and pursued personal guaranties after borrowers defaulted on loans. The borrowers challenged the bank's right to sue in Florida state court without registering as a foreign corporation and argued material fact disputes existed regarding the
• Cleveland v. Piper Aircraft Corp.
  985 F.2d 1438· 10th Cir.· 1993-02-16 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the Federal Aviation Act does not preempt state common law tort claims for airplane design defects, and that the trial court erred in limiting the scope of the new trial to exclude retrial of damages.
• Daniels v. Executive Director of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commision
  127 F.4th 1294· 11th Cir.· 2025-02-06 ·cited 6×
  Tim Daniels, a commercial fisherman, challenged Florida regulations restricting his use of gill nets to harvest pompano in federal waters, arguing the Magnuson-Stevens Act preempted state authority over fishing in the exclusive economic zone and that the regulations violated the
• Carson v. Monsanto Co.
  72 F.4th 1261· 11th Cir.· 2023-07-10 ·cited 6×
  The en banc court held that the question of whether a federal agency action lacking the force of law can preempt state law under an express preemption provision must be answered by ordinary principles of statutory interpretation. The court remanded the case to the panel to decide
• Kligfeld v. State
  876 So. 2d 36· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-06-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Chapter 626, Part X, Florida Statutes, does not expressly preempt Chapter 517, Florida Statutes, and therefore the sale of viatical settlement agreements, which qualify as securities, is subject to regulation under Chapter 517.
• GLA & Assocs., Inc. v. The City OF Boca Raton
  855 So. 2d 278· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-10-08 ·cited 6×
  GLA and Associates, a residential condominium developer, challenged a Boca Raton city ordinance requiring permits for coastal construction activities seaward of the coastal construction control line. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment, holding that GLA
• Associated Indus. OF Mass. v. Snow
  898 F.2d 274· 1st Cir.· 1990-03-15 ·cited 6×
  State asbestos abatement regulations are not preempted by the federal OSH Act if they serve a legitimate and substantial purpose apart from worker protection, even if more stringent than federal standards. However, provisions solely for worker protection are preempted.
• Auto. Importers OF Am., Inc. v. State OF Minn. & the Attorney Gen. for the State of Minn.
  871 F.2d 717· 8th Cir.· 1989-03-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Minnesota consumer law requiring automobile manufacturers to participate in informal dispute resolution mechanisms, allow oral presentations at the consumer's option, and permit charging consumers a fee is not preempted by the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
• Moore v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.
  867 F.2d 243· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-08 ·cited 6×
  Federal law, specifically 21 U.S.C. § 360k, preempts state law claims against tampon manufacturers based solely on inadequate warning and labeling, but not claims related to design, composition, or construction.
• NEW Jersey Chamber OF Commerce v. Hughey
  868 F.2d 621· 3d Cir.· 1989-02-28 ·cited 6×
  The New Jersey Worker and Community Right to Know Act's container labeling provisions are not impliedly preempted by the OSH Act and OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard because they do not stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment of federal purposes.
• Missouri Pacific Railroad v. R.R. Comm'n OF Tex.
  850 F.2d 264· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-29 ·cited 6×
  The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's finding that the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA) preempts Texas' regulation requiring cabooses on freight trains.
• First Fed. S & L Ass'n of Gadsden Cty. v. Peterson
  516 F. Supp. 732· N.D. Fla.· 1981-06-22 ·cited 6×
  Federal regulation of due-on-sale clauses in mortgages issued by federally chartered savings and loan associations preempts conflicting state law, requiring enforcement of these clauses when the Federal Home Loan Bank Board deems it necessary for the associations' financial stabi
• Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Cuddihee
  47 Fla. L. Weekly S78· Fla. 1st DCA· 2022-05-04 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court affirmed a jury verdict against Philip Morris USA, Inc. in an Engle-progeny case. The court found sufficient evidence that the decedent detrimentally relied on misleading advertisements for "low-tar" cigarettes, which contributed to his smoking, cancer, and de
• Stamps v. Collagen Corp.
  984 F.2d 1416· 5th Cir.· 1993-02-19 ·cited 5×
  State law tort claims against a medical device manufacturer are preempted by the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (MDA) if they impose requirements different from or in addition to federal requirements applicable to the device.
• King v. Collagen Corp.
  983 F.2d 1130· 1st Cir.· 1993-01-15 ·cited 5×
  Federal law preempts state law claims regarding medical device labeling and safety, including fraud claims based on allegations of misleading the FDA, unless the fraud is found to be outside the scope of the regulation.
• Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Lourie
  198 So. 3d 975· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-08-10 ·cited 4×
  Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds appeal a judgment in favor of the estate of Barbara Ruth Lourie in an Engle-progeny tobacco litigation case. The court affirms, rejecting the tobacco companies' implied preemption defense both on res judicata grounds and on the merits, holding that
• John K. Vreeland ad Litem for the Estate of Jose Martinez v. Ferrer
  28 So. 3d 906· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-01-06 ·cited 4×
  This wrongful death case addresses whether a federal statute preempts Florida's dangerous instrumentality doctrine to shield aircraft owners/lessors from vicarious liability when they do not possess or control the aircraft at the time of negligent operation. The court held that 4
• Eirman v. Olde Disc. Corp.
  697 So. 2d 865· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-05-21 ·cited 4×
  Paul Eirman sued securities broker Olde Discount Corporation for failing to adequately disclose its practice of receiving "order flow payments" from wholesale dealers who executed customer orders. The trial court dismissed the complaint, finding federal securities law preempts st
• Prof'l Lawn Care Ass'n v. Vill. OF Milford
  909 F.2d 929· 6th Cir.· 1990-08-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) impliedly preempts local ordinances regulating pesticide use, even those framed as public notice requirements.
• ANR Pipeline Co. & ANR Storage Co. v. Schneidewind
  801 F.2d 228· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-15 ·cited 4×
  The Natural Gas Act implicitly preempts Michigan's securities regulation law for natural gas companies, and the state law unconstitutionally burdens interstate commerce.
• Rollins Env't Servs. (FS), Inc. v. The Parish OF ST. James
  775 F.2d 627· 5th Cir.· 1985-11-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction and that the St. James Parish Ordinance 85-1 was preempted by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TOSCA) and thus invalid.
• Wolpin v. Philip Morris, Inc.
  974 F. Supp. 1465· S.D. Fla.· 1997-08-18 ·cited 3×
  The Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA) does not preempt state law claims based on a tobacco company's failure to warn non-smokers about the dangers of second-hand smoke, nor does it preempt claims of civil conspiracy or failure to test.
• Wolicki-Gables v. Doctors Same DAY Surgery Ctr., Ltd.
  216 So. 3d 665· Fla. 2d DCA· 2017-02-15 ·cited 2×
  The Gableses brought a third-party spoliation claim against a surgery center, alleging that if the center had preserved a defective pain-pump connector, they could have sued the manufacturer Arrow International for negligent design or manufacture. The appellate court affirmed sum
• Classy Cycles, Inc. v. BAY Cnty.
  201 So. 3d 779· Fla. 1st DCA· 2016-09-28 ·cited 2×
  Classy Cycles challenges local ordinances requiring safety vests and insurance for motor scooter rentals. The First District Court of Appeal reverses the trial court's decision, holding that Florida's comprehensive motor vehicle regulation in Chapter 316 expressly preempts local
• THE Lake Hamilton Lakeshore Owners Ass'n, Inc. v. Neidlinger
  182 So. 3d 738· Fla. 2d DCA· 2015-12-30 ·cited 2×
  The Lake Hamilton Lakeshore Owners Association appealed a dismissal of its nuisance complaint against an airboat tour operator, arguing that commercial airboat noise constituted a private nuisance. The court reversed, holding that state law does not preempt nuisance claims and th
• Bacon v. Stiefel Labs., Inc.
  677 F. Supp. 2d 1331· S.D. Fla.· 2010-01-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that plaintiffs' ERISA claims should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies because the Committee lacked the power to grant the requested relief, and that the federal securities claim could proceed as the company's statements about stock pr
• Phantom OF Brevard, Inc. v. Brevard Cnty.
  966 So. 2d 423· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-08-31 ·cited 2×
  Phantom of Brevard challenged Brevard County fireworks ordinances as unconstitutional and preempted by state law. The Fifth District Court of Appeal held that Chapter 791, Florida Statutes does not expressly or impliedly preempt local fireworks regulation, but severed four sectio
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Commonwealth OF Mass.
  987 F.2d 64· 1st Cir.· 1993-03-04 ·cited 2×
  Massachusetts' law requiring medical examinations for employees aged seventy and older as a condition of continued employment violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and is preempted by federal law.
• TOY Mfrs. OF Am., Inc. v. Blumenthal
  986 F.2d 615· 2d Cir.· 1992-12-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Federal Hazardous Substances Act's regulations concerning small parts in toys do not preempt a Connecticut law requiring warning labels on toys intended for children aged three to seven that pose a choking hazard to younger children.
• Worm v. Am. Cyanamid Co.
  970 F.2d 1301· 4th Cir.· 1992-06-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) does not preempt state common law tort and contract claims unless they impose labeling requirements 'in addition to or different from' those established by federal law. Claims related to product te
• Smallwood v. Off. OF Thrift Supervision
  925 F.2d 894· 6th Cir.· 1991-02-07 ·cited 2×
  The Director's order waiving state law requirements for a savings association's conversion to a federal stock-owned association was within his statutory authority and not arbitrary or capricious.
• Burlington N. R.R. Co. v. State OF Minn.
  882 F.2d 1349· 8th Cir.· 1989-08-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Federal Railroad Safety Act and related FRA regulations preempt Minnesota's occupied caboose law because the FRA's actions and inaction regarding cabooses constitute an implied ruling that such state regulations are inappropriate.
• Carson v. Monsanto Co.
  92 F.4th 980· 11th Cir.· 2024-02-05 ·cited 1×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) does not expressly preempt a state failure-to-warn claim because Georgia's common law duty to warn is narrower than, and thus consistent with, federal requirements. The court also found
• State v. Coleman
  320 So. 3d 890· Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-05-07 ·cited 1×
  The court held that a police officer can lawfully arrest and search a person for violating a municipal ordinance if that ordinance regulates criminal conduct. The case turned on whether Sarasota's "open container" ordinance regulated criminal or noncriminal conduct, and the court
• Byrnes v. Honda Motor Co., Ltd.
  845 F. Supp. 875· S.D. Fla.· 1994-02-28 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the National Traffic & Motor Vehicle Safety Act does not expressly preempt state law product liability claims regarding vehicle lighting, and that the obviousness of a lighting defect is a question of comparative negligence, not a bar to liability.
• Med. Soc'y OF the State OF NEW York v. Cuomo
  976 F.2d 812· 2d Cir.· 1992-09-24 ·cited 1×
  New York's Chapter 572, which limits the amount physicians can charge Medicare beneficiaries for balance billing, is not preempted by the Medicare Act because Congress has not clearly intended to occupy the field or create a conflict with federal objectives.
• Beveridge v. Lewis
  939 F.2d 859· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-29 ·cited 1×
  Federal regulations under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act do not preempt a Santa Barbara city ordinance regulating boat anchoring, as there is neither implicit preemption nor an actual conflict with federal law.
• Wilson v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2026-07-01
  Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does not preempt Florida's statutory damages cap under section 768.28(5) because the cap is a remedy limitation that does not interfere with Title VII's substantive protections or core objectives of eliminating employment discrimination.
• Upside Foods Inc v. Comm'r, Fla. Dep't of Agric. an
  11th Cir.· 2026-03-23
  Florida's SB 1084 banning the manufacture and sale of lab-grown meat is not preempted by the federal Poultry Products Inspection Act because it does not regulate the premises, facilities, operations, or ingredients of poultry processors. Although Upside has a cause of action in e
• Thelen v. Somatics, LLC
  11th Cir.· 2025-09-29
  Jeffrey Thelen sued Somatics, manufacturer of an electroconvulsive therapy device, alleging the company failed to adequately warn him of the risk of permanent memory loss and brain damage from 95 ECT treatments he received between 2014 and 2016. The jury found that Somatics provi
• 2145 Avocado Land Tr. v. Fla. E. Coast Ry., LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-08-14
  The court held that the defendant railroad is not entitled to dismissal of the plaintiffs' takings and trespass claims at this stage, as the claims are not clearly preempted by the ICCTA and the plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged state actor status for the takings claim.
• Novo Nordisk Inc. v. Brooksville Pharms. Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-05-12
  Novo Nordisk sued Brooksville Pharmaceuticals under Florida's unfair trade practices law to prevent the pharmacy from compounding and selling semaglutide injections, claiming the products were adulterated and misbranded drugs that harmed consumers and cost Novo Nordisk sales. The
• Novo Nordisk Inc. v. Brooksville Pharms. Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-11-08
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim was preempted by the FDCA and failed to state a claim under FDUTPA, granting the motion to dismiss with leave to amend.
• Thelen v. Somatics, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-05-05
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact preclude summary judgment on the statute of limitations defense and the learned intermediary doctrine, but granted summary judgment on claims for express warranty, manufacturing defect, design defect, punitive damages, and certa
• Env't Prot. Comm'n of Hillsborough Cnty. v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-04-18
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims regarding post-sale tampering with vehicle emission control systems are not preempted by the Clean Air Act, but dismissed claims based on a theory of inaction (failure to remove a defeat device) for failing to state a plausible claim.
• Thelen v. Somatics, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-03-31
  The court granted in part and denied in part Elektrika's motion to dismiss, dismissing implied warranty counts but allowing negligence and strict liability claims to proceed.
• Fla. Beach Advertising, LLC v. City of Treasure Island
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-01-06
  A digital advertising business owner challenged a city ordinance prohibiting signs on waterways, arguing it violated the First Amendment by granting city officials unbridled discretion to grant exemptions without objective criteria. The court ruled that the ordinance was an uncon
• Classy Cycles, Inc. v. Panama City Beach
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-11-13
  The appellate court affirmed a lower court's decision upholding city ordinances that prohibited the overnight rental and, eventually, all rentals of motorized scooters. The court found the ordinances were a reasonable exercise of the city's police powers to ensure public safety a
• W. Flagler Assocs., Ltd v. City of Miami
  S.D. Fla.· 2019-09-06
  The court held that an as-applied due process claim is not ripe until the plaintiff seeks an exception under the new ordinance, but a facial due process claim is ripe. The court also found the plaintiff had standing and sufficiently alleged claims for impairment of contract and e