-
617 So. 2d 724·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1993-03-19
·cited 1×
The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's suppression order, holding that a search warrant describing items to be seized in a complex fraud investigation was sufficiently particular under Florida law, except for one overly broad paragraph. The court distinguishe
-
506 U.S. 1011·
U.S.·
1992-11-30
·cited 1×
-
782 F. Supp. 586·
M.D. Fla.·
1991-11-12
·cited 1×
A city ordinance limiting the number of American flags that can be displayed on private property is unconstitutional as applied to a commercial entity displaying multiple flags, as the display constitutes expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment.
-
748 F. Supp. 1520·
S.D. Fla.·
1990-09-28
·cited 1×
The court held that Article V, Section 12 of the Florida Constitution, as applied to bar a complainant from revealing the fact that a complaint against a judge was filed with the Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC), violates the First Amendment's free speech clause.
-
736 F. Supp. 1103·
S.D. Fla.·
1990-05-04
·cited 1×
The court held that the park regulations, as applied and narrowly construed by the park manager, did not violate the plaintiffs' First Amendment rights to free speech or expression, and that the regulations were not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad.
-
679 F. Supp. 1547·
S.D. Fla.·
1988-02-25
·cited 1×
The court held that the Mayor's actions in silencing and removing the plaintiff from a public meeting violated the plaintiff's First Amendment rights, as the speech was protected political expression and not a genuine disruption.
-
726 F. Supp. 1556·
S.D. Fla.·
1987-10-13
·cited 1×
The court held that the distance ordinances were facially valid time, place, and manner regulations, but the special uses ordinances restricting adult nightclubs to a specific zone were problematic and potentially unconstitutional as applied.
-
803 F.2d 236·
6th Cir.·
1986-10-08
·cited 1×
Prison officials may reject inmate mail that could incite violence, and due process requires notice to the sender, but not necessarily through a formal regulation.
-
488 So. 2d 153·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1986-05-13
·cited 1×
Three chiropractors appealed disciplinary sanctions imposed by the Board of Chiropractic Examiners for allegedly deceptive advertising and failure to properly identify themselves with D.C. credentials. The court reversed the sanctions, finding the advertising regulation unconstit
-
636 F. Supp. 1078·
N.D. Fla.·
1986-05-01
·cited 1×
The court held that the amended ordinance, as a content-neutral time, place, and manner restriction on commercial speech, does not violate the First Amendment or the Equal Protection Clause.
-
616 F. Supp. 971·
S.D. Fla.·
1985-03-30
·cited 1×
The court held that the town ordinance prohibiting shirtless running in certain public areas is a reasonable exercise of the town's police power and does not violate the plaintiff's constitutional rights to free expression or equal protection.
-
523 F. Supp. 1135·
S.D. Fla.·
1981-09-30
·cited 1×
The court held that the regulation 31 C.F.R. § 515.415 is constitutional on its face and as applied, and the indictment correctly charges an offense under the Trading With the Enemy Act.
-
384 So. 2d 1261·
Fla.·
1980-06-05
·cited 1×
Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the state's extortion and anti-solicitation of legal business statutes against First Amendment challenges. The defendant was charged after threatening to take legal action against a development company unless hired as counsel,
-
D.D.C.·
1977-01-10
·cited 1×
The court held that Air Force Regulation 35-15, prohibiting military personnel from participating in demonstrations in foreign countries, was not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad as applied to the appellant's conduct.
-
38 Fla. Supp. 47·
Broward Cty. Cir. Ct.·
1972-11-22
·cited 1×
The court held that the Florida statute prohibiting disorderly conduct is constitutional as applied by Florida courts, and the information tracking the statute was sufficient.
-
431 F.2d 1354·
5th Cir.·
1970-07-06
·cited 1×
-
398 U.S. 916·
U.S.·
1970-05-25
·cited 1×
-
11th Cir.·
2026-08-04
Florida's Protection of Children Act is facially constitutional and does not violate the First or Fourteenth Amendments because it regulates only material obscene for minors under the Miller-for-minors test, which receives rational-basis review. The word 'lewd' in the Act is not
-
11th Cir.·
2026-07-07
The Individual Freedom Act's prohibition on university professors promoting or endorsing eight specified concepts relating to race, color, sex, and national origin violates the First Amendment as applied to public university professors. Garcetti v. Ceballos does not extend to cla
-
S.D. Fla.·
2026-01-23
The court held that defendants' objections to discovery requests were waived or overruled due to lack of specificity and boilerplate language, and granted the motion to compel.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2026-01-06
The court held that the City's noise ordinance was not facially unconstitutional and that the plaintiffs failed to state an as-applied claim under the First Amendment or a selective enforcement claim. The court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state la
-
Del. Ch.·
2026-01-02
BankUnited sought a preliminary injunction against former executives and their new employer Customers Bank for allegedly violating non-solicitation obligations. The Delaware Court of Chancery denied the injunction, finding BankUnited unlikely to succeed on the merits because the
-
11th Cir.·
2025-12-04
The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying a preliminary injunction, finding the plaintiffs likely to succeed on their First Amendment challenge to the ordinance.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-12-01
The court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction, finding the plaintiff did not establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits regarding the city's time, place, and manner restrictions on protest.
-
11th Cir.·
2025-11-14
The court held that plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge sign regulations because the city denied their applications based on an unchallenged billboard prohibition, which was the actual cause of their injury.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-08-01
The court granted in part and denied in part all pending discovery motions, ordering parties to amend their discovery responses and comply with specific rules regarding objections and production.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-19
The court held that the plaintiff's Second Requests for Production were patently overbroad and denied the motion to compel their production.
-
11th Cir.·
2025-05-13
Florida's Senate Bill 1438 criminalized knowingly admitting children to "adult live performances," including those depicting "lewd conduct," but the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held the law was likely unconstitutional on its face because the vague definition of "lewd conduc
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-17
The court held that Plaintiff's motion to compel discovery must be denied because Plaintiff failed to address most of Defendants' objections and the requests were overbroad.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-24
The court held that the defendant's objections to the plaintiff's discovery requests were waived due to being boilerplate and not adequately addressed in the response to the motion to compel.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-01-21
The court held that Jet Blast failed to meet the requirements of the apex doctrine to depose high-ranking executives and that its motion to compel production was based on insufficient evidence.
-
Fla. 4th DCA·
2025-01-08
Section 836.10(2), Florida Statutes, is constitutional both facially and as applied, and does not violate First Amendment rights because it narrowly targets threats of violence.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-01-03
The court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff's first motion to compel, finding Defendants' use of Rule 33(d) inadequate for certain interrogatories and their objections to requests for production to be substantially justified. The second motion to compel was denied with
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-10-22
The court overruled most of Panama's objections to discovery requests, ordering production of documents, and directed parties to confer on specific issues, while sustaining some objections as irrelevant to the setoff defense.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-07-09
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its First Amendment challenge to the county's closing time ordinance.
-
389 So. 3d 413·
Fla.·
2024-06-20
A person cannot be guilty of riot under section 870.01(2) unless the person engages in, or intends to assist others in engaging in, violent and disorderly conduct. To 'willfully participate' in a 'violent public disturbance,' a defendant must intentionally, knowingly, and purpose
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2024-05-17
The Delaware Supreme Court held that while the state's stalking statute (11 Del.C. § 1312) is overbroad because it criminalizes protected speech content in certain applications, it is not facially invalid. The court found that the unconstitutional applications were not substantia
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-03-22
The court held that discovery requests for information regarding the plaintiff's health and medical history related to her FMLA claim were largely relevant and discoverable, but denied compelling the plaintiff to execute HIPAA releases.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-02-23
The court denied the plaintiff's renewed motion to compel discovery because it failed to comply with local rules and court orders, and lacked specificity regarding the relief sought.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-02-14
The court held that boilerplate and unsupported objections are waived and overruled, and granted in part the motion to compel discovery, while denying sanctions and specific deposition scheduling requests.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-01-23
The court established standing discovery procedures for the Southern District of Florida, emphasizing compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and local rules.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-01-12
The court granted plaintiffs' motion for an indicative ruling, stating it would clarify its prior summary judgment order to explicitly confirm that the In-Office Restrictions violated the First Amendment's overbreadth doctrine.
-
Fla. 2d DCA·
2023-12-29
The appellate court affirmed the issuance of injunctions for stalking but reversed them in part, finding that the injunctions' broad prohibitions on public statements constituted an unconstitutional prior restraint on protected speech. The court clarified that while injunctions c
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-12-14
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to compel discovery, ordering the plaintiff to amend his responses to interrogatories and requests for production, and sustaining in part and overruling in part the plaintiff's objections.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2023-11-03
NCF Freedom Inc. and other New College faculty and students sued to block the enforcement of Florida's SB 266, which restricts what can be taught in general education courses and limits state funding for certain campus programs and activities, arguing the law violates First Amend
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-08-25
The court held that defendants failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on appeal regarding the scope of the injunction, and thus denied their motion for a stay pending appeal.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2023-07-03
A federal district court blocked Florida from enforcing two provisions of a law regulating third-party voter registration organizations: a requirement that only U.S. citizens can collect voter registration applications, and a ban on retaining voter information, finding both viola
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-05-15
The court denied the defendants' motion for a stay of the preliminary injunction pending appeal, finding they were unlikely to succeed on the merits.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-04-05
The court held that Plaintiffs Garcia and Fernández have standing to challenge the in-office lobbying restrictions, but no plaintiff has standing to challenge the post-office restrictions. The Attorney General and Chief Financial Officer are proper defendants.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-03-23
The court held that while the plaintiff plausibly alleged facial constitutional violations, her as-applied challenges and the commingling of claims warranted dismissal without prejudice, granting leave to amend.