-
15 F. Supp. 2d 1338·
S.D. Fla.·
1998-07-21
·cited 1×
Federal courts should not intervene in state election disputes involving fraud unless the entire process is fundamentally unfair, and equitable considerations and federalism principles weigh against such intervention.
-
975 F. Supp. 1333·
M.D. Fla.·
1997-08-27
·cited 1×
White's Place, Inc., operator of an adult entertainment establishment called The Gold Club, sought a preliminary injunction against the City of Jacksonville and Sheriff Glover to prevent enforcement of the Jacksonville Adult Entertainment and Services Code, alleging the ordinance
-
887 F.2d 1528·
11th Cir.·
1989-11-13
·cited 1×
The United States has a right to recover its property loaned to a state agency when the agency refuses to return it, and federal courts have jurisdiction over such actions.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2026-02-12
The federal court dismissed the plaintiff's amended complaint, holding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and the prior exclusive jurisdiction doctrine, and that the claims failed to state a plausible legal claim.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2026-02-06
The court held that Plaintiff lacked Article III standing and that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred federal review of the claims, warranting dismissal of the complaint.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2026-01-26
The court granted the motions to dismiss, finding the federal takings claim failed for not alleging public use and dismissing state law claims for lack of jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2026-01-16
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was deficient and granted her an opportunity to amend it.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2026-01-15
The court held that claims seeking review of state court custody decisions are barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and the complaint is dismissed as a shotgun pleading, but with leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2026-01-12
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to deny the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the amended complaint with prejudice.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2026-01-09
The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, denying the plaintiff's motions because the Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars federal jurisdiction over claims arising from state court judgments.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2026-01-08
Federal court lacks jurisdiction to review state court rulings or grant relief against state judges and clerks for actions taken in their judicial capacities.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-12-29
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's complaint due to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, as the case impermissibly sought review of a state court judgment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-12-29
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to issue a writ of prohibition against a state court and that the petition failed to state a claim under § 1983 due to sovereign immunity and the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-12-22
The court held that claims for reinstatement are dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, while claims for damages are dismissed on the merits for failure to state a claim.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-19
The court recommended dismissal of the plaintiff's second amended complaint for failing to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction and for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-02
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and personal jurisdiction over Chase Bank due to improper service, thus dismissing the complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-01
The district court denied the plaintiff's motion for an injunction pending appeal because the Rooker-Feldman doctrine divested it of jurisdiction to review the plaintiff's challenge to a state court judgment, and denied the defendant's motion for sanctions without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-01
The court held that Younger abstention requires dismissal of claims seeking declaratory and injunctive relief when an ongoing state criminal proceeding implicates important state interests and offers an adequate opportunity for review.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-21
The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine deprives federal courts of subject matter jurisdiction over claims that seek to modify or overturn state court judgments.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-19
The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-17
The court granted the defendant's motion to stay discovery pending a ruling on the motion to dismiss.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-14
A judge is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity and absolute judicial immunity for actions taken in her official capacity, and a state is not a 'person' under § 1983, warranting dismissal of the complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-06
The court held that it would take the motion to proceed in forma pauperis under advisement and grant the plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint due to deficiencies in pleading and potential lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-03
The court held that while it had jurisdiction, the plaintiff's claims failed on the merits because they were based on a mistaken interpretation of Florida law regarding sex offender registration exemptions.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-17
The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not apply because the plaintiff's claims do not require review of state court judgments, but the complaint is dismissed without prejudice for being a shotgun pleading.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-14
The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not bar the plaintiff's claims, but the complaint must be dismissed without prejudice for failure to properly allege diversity jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-10
The court held that the amended complaint failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction based on federal question or diversity of citizenship.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-08
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine because the plaintiff's claims constituted a collateral attack on a prior state court judgment.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-29
The Court held that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claims because they constitute an impermissible appellate review of state court judgments under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-23
The court held that the amended complaint fails to state a claim and is frivolous, warranting dismissal.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-09-05
The court recommended denial of the plaintiffs' emergency motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-04
The court recommended dismissal of the action because it is barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and judicial immunity, and thus fails to state a claim.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-02
The court recommended dismissal of the complaint without prejudice because it lacked federal question jurisdiction, was subject to abstention doctrines, and claims were barred by judicial and litigation immunities.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-12
The court held that the removal was improper due to multiple procedural defects, including untimeliness, lack of unanimity among defendants, and forum defendant rule, warranting remand to state court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-06
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to comply with federal pleading standards and lacked subject matter jurisdiction, warranting dismissal without prejudice.
-
11th Cir.·
2025-07-30
The district court erred in dismissing the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction based on state law, as federal law governs a federal court's jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-07-30
The federal court denied Plaintiff's emergency motions because it likely lacks jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine to review or enjoin a state court foreclosure sale and judgment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-07-28
The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by sovereign immunity, judicial immunity, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and the definition of 'person' under § 1983, warranting dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-22
A federal court cannot enjoin state court proceedings under the Anti-Injunction Act unless an exception applies, and principles of comity and federalism require respect for state judicial systems.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-07-17
A duplicative complaint filed by a prisoner is properly dismissed as malicious under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and barred by collateral estoppel.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-07-14
The court held that while the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and res judicata do not apply, the plaintiff's claims are time-barred by the statute of limitations, and the only non-time-barred claim involves a private actor not subject to § 1983.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-10
The federal district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review a state agency's denial of a concealed weapons license, affirmed by a state appellate court, under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and due to lack of standing.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-02
The court granted the motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for breach of contract, constructive fraud, or FDCPA violations due to a lack of specific factual allegations and untimeliness.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-30
The federal court dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding it barred by Rooker-Feldman, Younger abstention, and the domestic relations exception.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-23
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint must be dismissed and her motion for a temporary restraining order denied because the action constitutes an improper collateral attack on a state court foreclosure judgment, barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-20
The court held that claims against judges are barred by judicial immunity, and the remaining claims are dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to Rooker-Feldman, Younger abstention, and the domestic relations exception.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-17
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction due to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and Younger abstention, warranting dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-06
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to grant a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 because the applicant sought to intervene in or review ongoing state criminal proceedings, which is barred by the Younger and Rooker-Feldman doctrines.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-27
Plaintiff Juravin sued two state court judges and Lake County, alleging violations of his due process, access to courts, and religious freedom rights based on their handling of his involvement in multiple state court cases. The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice, fin
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-05-12
The court held that the pro se plaintiff cannot bring claims on behalf of his minor son, the court cannot issue injunctive relief without a complaint, and the Younger doctrine bars interference with ongoing state dependency proceedings.