Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))

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

• Dyer v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
  2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72341· M.D. Fla.· 2015-06-04
  The court held that letters sent by a debt collector were not made 'in connection with the collection of any debt' and therefore were not covered by the FDCPA.
• Smith v. ARS Nat'l Servs. Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2015-04-20
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged a violation of the FDCPA, and therefore denied the defendant's motion to dismiss.
• Cortes v. Honeywell Bldg. Solutions SES Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2014-08-12
  The court held that the plaintiffs' negligence and gross negligence claims were sufficiently pleaded to survive a motion to dismiss, and the FPL Tariff did not bar these claims.
• Archer v. Connors
  857 F. Supp. 2d 1269· S.D. Fla.· 2014-02-26
  The court held that the statute of limitations for an FDCPA claim based on a deceptive notice served with a foreclosure complaint begins to run from the date of service, not the date of filing.
• Vista Mktg., LLC v. Burkett
  858 F. Supp. 2d 1084· M.D. Fla.· 2014-02-13
  The court held that the Stored Communications Act does not provide for secondary liability, such as conspiracy claims, and therefore, a conspiracy claim under the SCA fails as a matter of law.
• Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Weaver Aggregate Transp., Inc.
  849 F. Supp. 2d 1055· M.D. Fla.· 2013-12-26
  The court denied all pending dispositive motions, finding genuine disputes of material fact and plausible claims that precluded dismissal or summary judgment at this stage.
• Kaan v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
  1992 WL 119944· S.D. Fla.· 2013-11-05
  A prior dismissed foreclosure action does not bar subsequent foreclosure actions based on different or later defaults, and a quiet title claim based on such dismissal fails if the note and mortgage remain valid and enforceable.
• Martinez v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  15 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2218· S.D. Fla.· 2013-09-30
  The court held that Miami-Dade County adequately pleaded claims for contribution and indemnification, but dismissed the bad faith claim as Florida does not recognize such a cause of action.
• SIG, Inc. v. AT & T Digit. Life, Inc.
  832 F. Supp. 2d 1222· S.D. Fla.· 2013-09-12
  The court held that AT&T Defendants' motion to dismiss contract and statutory claims is denied because the click-through agreement cannot be considered at this stage, but the unjust enrichment claim against them is dismissed. The Diamond Defendants' motion to dismiss contract and
• Kaiser v. DePuy Spine, Inc.
  1989 WL 245189· M.D. Fla.· 2013-05-14
  The court held that the plaintiff's state law claims for negligence and strict liability were preempted by the Medical Device Amendments (MDA) because the plaintiff failed to allege a "parallel claim" demonstrating a violation of specific federal requirements, and Florida law doe
• Kissinger v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
  2012 WL 3759034· S.D. Fla.· 2012-08-30
  The court held that creditors can be held vicariously liable for a servicer's failure to comply with TILA's disclosure requirements, and that TILA is not unconstitutionally vague.
• Khan v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon
  654 F. App'x 11· S.D. Fla.· 2012-03-19
  A creditor can be held vicariously liable for a loan servicer's failure to comply with TILA's requirement to identify the loan owner.
• Arlozynski v. Rubin & Debski, P.A.
  710 F. Supp. 2d 1308· M.D. Fla.· 2010-05-07
  Individual officers and directors of a debt collection company can be held personally liable under the FDCPA if they directly or indirectly collect or attempt to collect debts, regardless of their corporate role.
• Masvidal v. United States Dep't of Just.
  716 F. Supp. 2d 1207· S.D. Fla.· 2010-04-02
  The court held that the plaintiff adequately alleged a due process claim, as the alleged stigma plus interference with employment constituted a deprivation of a constitutionally protected interest, and the absolute privilege defense did not apply to a due process claim.
• Omega Forensic Eng'g, Inc. v. RLI Ins.
  682 F. Supp. 2d 1336· S.D. Fla.· 2010-02-08
  The court held that the spoliation of evidence does not constitute 'property damage' under the insurance policy, and therefore the insurer has no duty to defend.
• Smith v. Zazzle. Com, Inc.
  589 F. Supp. 2d 1345· S.D. Fla.· 2008-12-09
  The Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act (FACTA) does not apply to internet receipts automatically displayed on a computer screen, as the term 'print' in the statute refers to tangible, paper receipts.
• Flava Works, Inc. v. City of Miami
  559 F. Supp. 2d 1318· S.D. Fla.· 2008-06-02
  The court held that most of the plaintiff's claims challenging the City's adult entertainment ordinance survived the motion to dismiss, but the takings claim was dismissed without prejudice.
• Bp Prods. N. Am., Inc. v. Giant Oil, Inc.
  545 F. Supp. 2d 1257· M.D. Fla.· 2008-04-02
  A contractual indemnity action can be filed before judgment is entered and damages are paid in the underlying action.
• Heritage Corp. of S. Fl v. Nat'l Union Fire In.
  463 F. Supp. 2d 1364· S.D. Fla.· 2006-10-27
  The court held that the plaintiff's bad faith claim failed because the underlying action was not resolved favorably to the insured, and damages were not caused by the insurer's alleged bad faith.
• Flint v. ABB, Inc.
  229 F. Supp. 2d 1338· S.D. Fla.· 2002-08-12
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for accrued interest on delayed benefits under ERISA because the amended complaint did not adequately allege a violation of the plan or ERISA that would give rise to equitable relief.
• Republic of Ecuador v. Philip Morris Cos.
  188 F. Supp. 2d 1359· S.D. Fla.· 2002-02-26
  The court held that the revenue rule, a common law doctrine preventing courts of one sovereign from enforcing the unadjudicated tax claims of another, requires abstention in this case, thus barring the Republic of Ecuador's civil RICO and common law claims against tobacco compani
• Temple v. Gorman
  201 F. Supp. 2d 1238· S.D. Fla.· 2002-01-29
  The court held that the Section 12(a)(1) claim was time-barred and that state securities law claims were preempted by federal law.
• Great-West Life & Annuity Ins. v. Smith
  180 F. Supp. 2d 1311· M.D. Fla.· 2002-01-04
  The court held that the ERISA claim (Count IV) against the law firm could proceed, but the state law claims for tortious interference and conversion (Counts V and VI) were preempted by ERISA.
• Coronado v. BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.
  951 F. Supp. 1025· S.D. Fla.· 1997-01-22
  The court held that BankAtlantic is immune from civil liability for disclosing suspected violations of law under the Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act.
• Chandler v. McMINNVILLE Sch. Dist.
  978 F.2d 524· 9th Cir.· 1992-10-28
  The court held that the district court erred in granting the defendant's motion to dismiss, as the plaintiffs stated a claim for relief.
• Stern v. Espirito Santo Bank of Fla.
  1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7989· S.D. Fla.· 1992-05-11
  The court held that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) imposes an affirmative obligation on creditors to reevaluate the need for an additional party's guaranty upon renewal of a credit obligation, and that a failure to do so without discrimination can give the additional par