Motion To Dismiss (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6))

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

• Hughes v. Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n OF the City OF NEW York, Inc.
  850 F.2d 876· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that allowing recovery for both intentional infliction of emotional distress and prima facie tort for the same conduct constitutes an impermissible double recovery under New York law, requiring reversal of the prima facie tort awards.
• Bass v. Jackson
  790 F.2d 260· 2d Cir.· 1986-05-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff's allegations, liberally construed, stated a claim for deliberate indifference to a known risk of harm and that the complaint sufficiently implicated supervisory officers Waters and Spinner in this claim.
• Experimental Eng'g, Inc. v. United Techs. Corp.
  614 F.2d 1244· 9th Cir.· 1980-03-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's claims for failure to state a claim or grant summary judgment, as the plaintiff alleged facts that, if proven, would entitle them to relief and material facts remained in dispute.
• Falls v. Town OF Dyer
  875 F.2d 146· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-22 ·cited 13×
  The court held that a plaintiff can state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for selective enforcement of a facially neutral ordinance if they can prove they were singled out for reasons other than legitimate governmental concerns.
• Robinson v. Block
  869 F.2d 202· 3d Cir.· 1989-02-28 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the "same address" test used by the DPW to presume siblings lived together for food stamp purposes was an impermissible interpretation of the Food Stamp Act. It also held that the dismissal of third-party verification claims and denial of leave to amend were e
• Furman v. Cirrito
  741 F.2d 524· 2d Cir.· 1984-07-27 ·cited 13×
  A plaintiff need not allege a "separate, distinct racketeering enterprise injury" beyond the injury caused by the predicate acts to state a claim under 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c).
• In re Checking Account Overdraft Litigation
  694 F. Supp. 2d 1302· S.D. Fla.· 2010-03-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that federal law does not preempt state law claims challenging the manipulative practices of national banks in assessing overdraft fees, as these claims only incidentally affect the banks' deposit-taking powers and do not conflict with the National Bank Act.
• Watterson v. Page
  987 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1993-02-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the psychologists were immune from suit under § 1983 because the plaintiffs failed to allege a violation of a constitutional right, and immune from state law claims under a state statute protecting good faith reporting of child abuse.
• Curtis W. Caine, Jr., M.D. v. M.D. Hardy, M.D.
  943 F.2d 1406· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint and in dismissing his suit under Rule 12(b)(6) without accepting his allegations of bias as true.
• Powers v. Boston Cooper Corp.
  926 F.2d 109· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims for breach of an oral employment contract and fraud in signing a release were properly dismissed for failure to state a claim.
• Swin Res. Sys., Inc. v. Lycoming Cnty.
  883 F.2d 245· 3d Cir.· 1989-08-25 ·cited 12×
  The operation of a landfill by Lycoming County is not protected by the market participant exception to the dormant Commerce Clause because it unduly burdens interstate commerce and is indistinguishable from prior cases limiting the exception.
• Brobst v. Columbus Servs. Int'l
  761 F.2d 148· 3d Cir.· 1985-05-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the prior consent decree does not automatically extend to all future operations of the defendant and that summary judgment was improperly granted on the plaintiffs' primary claim.
• McGARR v. United States
  736 F.2d 912· 3d Cir.· 1984-06-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint, as the allegations were sufficient to alert the defendant to the nature of the claim.
• Campbell v. Miller
  836 F. Supp. 827· M.D. Fla.· 1993-10-22 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' allegations were sufficient to state claims under MSAWPA, FLSA, FICA, and FUTA, and that the complaint was not so vague as to require a more definite statement.
• Sommer v. Correctional Officer R. Dixon
  709 F.2d 173· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-08 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the inmate's complaint failed to state a claim for a due process violation, as he received adequate notice and opportunity to be heard, and his conspiracy claim was too vague.
• Garrison v. Heublein, Inc.
  673 F.2d 189· 7th Cir.· 1982-03-17 ·cited 11×
  A manufacturer has no duty to warn consumers of the commonly known dangers associated with alcoholic beverages, as such dangers are not considered unreasonably dangerous.
• United States v. City OF Redwood City
  640 F.2d 963· 9th Cir.· 1981-02-23 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the United States may sue non-owners directly for wreck removal costs under the Wreck Removal Act and for oil cleanup costs under the FWPCA, and that maritime tort and nuisance claims are not precluded by the FWPCA.
• In re Managed Care Litigation
  595 F. Supp. 2d 1349· S.D. Fla.· 2009-01-28 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed and adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying dismissal of the ERISA claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but granting dismissal of state law claims due to ERISA preemption, and partially granting dismissal of the ADA's
• Hous. Opportunities Project for Excellence, Inc. v. Key Colony No. 4 Condo. Assoc., Inc.
  510 F. Supp. 2d 1003· S.D. Fla.· 2007-01-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that most claims stated a valid cause of action, but dismissed the retaliation claim and limited the statute of limitations for one plaintiff.
• Zilkha Energy Co. v. Leighton
  920 F.2d 1520· 10th Cir.· 1990-12-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the district court correctly dismissed the bankruptcy claims as time-barred under a proper interpretation of § 546(a), it erred in not considering the equitable claim for unjust enrichment under the doctrine of laches.
• Edwards v. Cass Cnty.
  919 F.2d 273· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a district court's refusal to allow a late-filed motion for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity is not an immediately appealable "final decision" under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, even if the refusal is an abuse of discretion.
• Nunley v. M/V Dauntless Colocotronis
  863 F.2d 1190· 5th Cir.· 1989-01-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding Combi Line not negligent and denying Captain Nunley's salvage claim, as Nunley's actions were part of his contractual duties with ChemLink.
• Huxall v. First State Bank
  842 F.2d 249· 10th Cir.· 1988-03-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a plaintiff alleging property deprivation without due process must demonstrate they were denied a meaningful opportunity to be heard or avail themselves of available state remedies.
• Cowan v. Corley
  814 F.2d 223· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff's allegations sufficiently stated claims under the Sherman Antitrust Act, RICO, and § 1983, and that dismissal was premature.
• Wren v. Carlson
  506 F.2d 131· D.C. Cir.· 1974-09-12 ·cited 10×
  The court concurred in the result that the case should be dismissed as frivolous and potentially transferred to the Northern District of Georgia.
• Allen v. Westpoint-Pepperell
  945 F.2d 40· 2d Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint adequately stated a claim for rescission of the release agreement based on allegations of fraud and mutual mistake, thus surviving a motion to dismiss.
• Garshman v. Universal Res. Holding Inc.
  824 F.2d 223· 3d Cir.· 1987-07-09 ·cited 9×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of antitrust and state law claims, finding that the allegations did not establish monopoly power, unlawful restraint of trade, or actionable duress or tortious interference.
• Reynolds v. Gables Residential Servs., Inc.
  428 F. Supp. 2d 1260· M.D. Fla.· 2006-04-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant, Gables Residential Services, Inc., is not a debt collector under the FDCPA or FCCPA, and therefore dismissed the claims against it. The court also denied the defendant's request for attorney's fees.
• Coyne v. City OF Somerville
  972 F.2d 440· 1st Cir.· 1992-08-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for violations of due process, equal protection, or freedom of speech under federal law, and affirmed the dismissal of state law claims.
• Villas of Lake Jackson, Ltd. v. Leon Cnty.
  796 F. Supp. 1477· N.D. Fla.· 1992-06-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that claims alleging the denial of all economically viable use of land are not ripe until the landowner seeks approval for development under current regulations and is denied. Claims for just compensation are also not ripe until state remedies are exhausted.
• Malvin W. Brubaker v. City OF Richmond
  943 F.2d 1363· 4th Cir.· 1991-08-08 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's imposition of Rule 11 sanctions, finding that the plaintiffs' claims were not well-grounded in fact or warranted by existing law after reasonable inquiry.
• Farias v. Bexar Cnty. Bd. OF Trs. FOR Mental Health Mental Retardation Servs.
  925 F.2d 866· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's denial of a jury trial motion was not reviewable because the order was too opaque and failed to demonstrate the exercise of discretion under Rule 39(b).
• Arnaud v. Odom
  870 F.2d 304· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that parents do not possess a constitutionally protected property or liberty interest in the bodies of their deceased children that would support a § 1983 claim when adequate state post-deprivation remedies exist for procedural due process claims, and no such subst
• Infinity Broad. Corp. OF Ill. v. The Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am.
  869 F.2d 1073· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-09 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the landlord's construction impaired the tenant's use, breaching the covenant of quiet enjoyment and entitling the tenant to compensation.
• Crane & Shovel Sales Corp. v. Bucyrus-Erie Co.
  854 F.2d 802· 6th Cir.· 1988-08-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the allegations against Bucyrus-Erie and GPS Equipment were insufficient to state a cause of action for antitrust violation.
• Fonte v. The Bd. OF Managers OF Cont'l Towers Condo.
  848 F.2d 24· 2d Cir.· 1988-05-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint without converting the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment when matters outside the pleadings were presented.
• Jones v. Duncan
  840 F.2d 359· 6th Cir.· 1988-03-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged state action for his section 1983 claim, as the commissioners' predicate actions in their official capacities and use of public funds to finance the ouster suit constituted action 'under color of law'.
• Robinson v. MFA Mut. Ins. Co. & Countryside Cas. Co.
  629 F.2d 497· 8th Cir.· 1980-06-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint stated a claim for relief under Arkansas law, specifically a tort claim in deceit, and therefore the district court erred in dismissing the action under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).
• Angus v. Shiley Inc.
  989 F.2d 142· 3d Cir.· 1993-03-29 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court properly exercised diversity jurisdiction and correctly granted summary judgment, as the plaintiff failed to state a claim for intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress under Pennsylvania law.
• Vanderklok v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., Inc.
  956 F.2d 610· 6th Cir.· 1992-02-13 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the disability clause must be read literally as requiring total disability from any occupation, but reversed the denial of benefits due to the insurer's failure to provide adequate written notice of denial as required by ERISA.
• FEE v. Herndon
  900 F.2d 804· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-09 ·cited 7×
  The court held that where a state provides adequate civil and criminal remedies for excessive corporal punishment, the use of such punishment, even if excessive, does not implicate federal substantive due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment because it does not constitut
• Caprera v. Jacobs
  790 F.2d 442· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-02 ·cited 7×
  The court held that a magistrate lacks jurisdiction to enter a final judgment if not all parties have explicitly consented to the magistrate's jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
• Albert v. Nat'l Cash Register Co.
  874 F. Supp. 1328· S.D. Fla.· 1994-01-03 ·cited 6×
  Individual defendants cannot be held liable under Title VII or the Florida Human Rights Act, but the claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress survives dismissal, and all remaining claims must be arbitrated.
• Vild v. Visconsi
  956 F.2d 560· 6th Cir.· 1992-02-10 ·cited 6×
  The dissent argues that the predicate acts were sufficiently related to meet the continuity requirement for a RICO claim.
• Taylor v. Wallace
  931 F.2d 698· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the record lacked sufficient indicia of reliability for confidential informant testimony, thus violating due process, and vacated the dismissal.
• Badea v. COX
  931 F.2d 573· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that because the prisoner was paroled, his civil rights action challenging conditions of confinement was proper, even if it should have initially been a habeas corpus petition.
• Hunter v. Stephenson Roofing, Inc.
  790 F.2d 472· 6th Cir.· 1986-05-07 ·cited 6×
  The ninety-day period for filing a Title VII suit begins to run when the EEOC mails the right-to-sue notice to the claimant's last known address, even if the claimant does not actually receive it, provided the claimant failed to notify the EEOC of an address change.
• Quilici v. Second Amendment Found.
  769 F.2d 414· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statements in the newsletter were expressions of opinion and not libelous per se, thus the district court properly granted the motion to dismiss.
• Meyer v. Oppenheimer Mgmt. Corp.
  764 F.2d 76· 2d Cir.· 1985-05-30 ·cited 6×
• Jerold B. Smith & The Cardinal Corp. v. Mossinghoff
  671 F.2d 533· D.C. Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Commissioner's determination that the delay in prosecuting the patent application was not unavoidable was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.