1,198 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,504 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
A prisoner's claim for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which challenges the validity of their conviction or sentence, is premature and must be dismissed if the conviction or sentence has not yet been invalidated.
-
833 F. Supp. 906·
S.D. Fla.·
1993-09-14
·cited 7×
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for injunctive relief because the alleged bad faith actions did not rise to the level of an imminent prosecution or infringement of constitutional rights, and federal courts should not interfere with state contempt proceed
-
The court held that a transaction does not become effective for purposes of 29 U.S.C. § 1369 until the transferor ceases making substantial contributions to the pension plan, and that a sham transaction claim under § 1362 survives dismissal.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under LMRDA § 431(c) because he did not demonstrate "just cause" for accessing union audiotapes, and that his § 411 claim was also without merit as it could not circumvent the "just cause" requirement.
-
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.
-
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.
-
The court held that while the complaint did not sufficiently state a federal claim, the district court should have allowed the pro se plaintiff an opportunity to amend her complaint to assert an Equal Pay Act claim.
-
925 F.2d 1555·
7th Cir.·
1991-02-19
·cited 7×
The court held that the dismissal of emotional distress claims was proper, but the grant of summary judgment on antitrust claims was erroneous, requiring further proceedings on market definition and power.
-
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
-
The court held that while parole board members are immune from damages claims, the sua sponte dismissal of the due process claim for equitable relief was improper because the revised Georgia parole system raises an arguable legal question regarding a liberty interest.
-
724 F. Supp. 1373·
S.D. Fla.·
1989-11-06
·cited 7×
The court held that the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA) does not grant private parties jurisdiction to seek injunctive relief, and that a prior injunction requiring the establishment of a trust bank account was improper. The court also found that while individuals
-
886 F.2d 673·
4th Cir.·
1989-09-26
·cited 7×
The court held that the district court erred in prematurely dismissing state law claims for lack of personal jurisdiction and in dismissing civil RICO claims for insufficient allegations of a pattern of racketeering activity.
-
The court held that ERISA does not provide a cause of action for contribution among co-fiduciaries, but reversed the dismissal of a breach of fiduciary duty claim because the plans may not have been fully compensated by a settlement.
-
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).
-
A probationary state employee terminated during their working test period, whose complaints did not involve matters of legitimate public concern and whose termination was not publicly disclosed, has no property or liberty interest infringed and thus no claim under the First, Fift
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint contained numerous deficiencies, including failure to state a claim, improper citation of statutes, and claims barred by immunity doctrines, requiring a second amended complaint.
-
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126149·
M.D. Fla.·
2015-09-21
·cited 6×
The court held that the omission of the phrase 'in writing' in a debt collection letter may violate the FDCPA, but granted dismissal of the FCCPA claim.
-
A debt collector's attempt to collect a debt discharged in bankruptcy can violate the FDCPA's prohibition against false or misleading representations, and the Bankruptcy Code does not preclude such claims.
-
The court held that a real estate company, as a third-party beneficiary, could not sue for breach of contract when the sale was to an LLC, not the individual named in the option, but could pursue claims for conspiracy to deprive a broker of commission and violation of FDUTPA.
-
The court held that hospitals and doctors do not owe a freestanding legal duty to allow visitation for patients in critical or terminal condition, nor a duty to provide routine medical updates to third parties not authorized to make medical decisions.
-
A claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in a first-party insurance contract is subsumed within a statutory bad faith action under Florida law and is premature if brought before coverage litigation is adjudicated.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs adequately pleaded claims for violation of Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) and unjust enrichment, and therefore denied the defendant's motion to dismiss.
-
The court denied defendants' motion to dismiss the breach of contract claim and motion for a more definite statement, finding the complaint sufficiently clear and supplemental jurisdiction appropriate.
-
571 F. Supp. 2d 1273·
S.D. Fla.·
2008-08-05
·cited 6×
The court held that the New Hampshire statute of limitations applied and was not tolled, and that the Florida litigation privilege barred the FCCPA claim against Orovitz.
-
560 F. Supp. 2d 1221·
M.D. Fla.·
2008-04-09
·cited 6×
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to adequately allege backdating of stock options, which is necessary to support claims of misrepresentation regarding stock option practices and accounting, and thus failed to state a claim under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.
-
395 F. Supp. 2d 1169·
S.D. Fla.·
2005-09-27
·cited 6×
The court granted in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing some Exchange Act claims while allowing Securities Act claims to proceed. The court found that Section 11 claims were adequately pleaded and not subject to the 'bespeaks caution' doctrine or Rule 9(b) particularity requi
-
The court held that the click agreements were valid and enforceable, prohibiting the commercial use of the PDP web site content, and therefore dismissed the plaintiffs' claims.
-
184 F. Supp. 2d 1301·
S.D. Fla.·
2002-02-06
·cited 6×
The court held that Florida's statutory bad faith claim does not apply to an insurance contract executed in New Jersey, as the claim sounds in contract and is governed by the law of the place where the contract was made.
-
164 F. Supp. 2d 1354·
S.D. Fla.·
2001-07-19
·cited 6×
The court held that a Title II claim requires exhaustion of state remedies, negligent retention requires employer knowledge of unfitness, and assault claims against employers fail if the employee's conduct is outside the scope of employment. Intentional infliction of emotional di
-
106 F. Supp. 2d 1272·
N.D. Fla.·
2000-07-25
·cited 6×
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against most defendants due to lack of pleading, immunity, or Eleventh Amendment bar, and also failed to state a claim for declaratory relief.
-
972 F. Supp. 1412·
M.D. Fla.·
1997-07-21
·cited 6×
The court held that the Tax Injunction Act bars federal jurisdiction over the challenge to Florida's special parking permit fees because the fees constitute a tax under state law and Florida courts provide an adequate forum.
-
The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded fraud with particularity under Rule 9(b) and that personal jurisdiction could potentially be exercised over certain defendants under Florida's long-arm statute, but not others.
-
The court held that a release agreement bars claims arising from pre-agreement conduct, and that the breach of contract claim failed because the contractual obligation to register stock had not yet been triggered.
-
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.
-
840 F. Supp. 1558·
S.D. Fla.·
1993-12-16
·cited 6×
The court held that law firms are not liable for securities fraud or aiding and abetting absent a fiduciary duty to third parties or a conscious intent to defraud, and that RICO claims require participation in the operation or management of the enterprise.
-
The Task Force is not an advisory committee subject to FACA because its members, including the President's spouse, are considered full-time officers or employees of the federal government. However, the status of the working group requires further determination.
-
The court held that summary judgment for the defendant on the conversion claim was proper, but reversed summary judgment on the contract claim due to ambiguity and remanded the fraud claim for further proceedings.
-
Federal courts lack jurisdiction under LMRA § 301 to hear tortious interference claims against non-signatories of a collective bargaining agreement, and such state law claims are preempted by § 301.
-
The court held that the plaintiff has standing to bring a derivative action despite a merger, but has not adequately pleaded demand futility.
-
The court held that service of process was insufficient for both defendants because the required acknowledgment of service was not filed, divesting the district court of personal jurisdiction.
-
The dissent argues that the predicate acts were sufficiently related to meet the continuity requirement for a RICO claim.
-
The court held that the district court correctly denied the Teals' motions to set aside the settlement agreement because they were untimely and lacked a basis under Rule 60(b).
-
The court held that the record lacked sufficient indicia of reliability for confidential informant testimony, thus violating due process, and vacated the dismissal.
-
The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the prisoner's § 1983 claim for failure to state a claim, as the complaint alleged sufficient facts regarding unconstitutional deprivation of food and punishment without due process.
-
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.
-
The court held that the dismissal of an employee by a federally funded organization was not state action, and therefore not actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, because the organization's relationship with the state was too tenuous.
-
A public school teacher does not have a First Amendment right to dictate curriculum content, and a school board may prohibit teaching creation science due to Establishment Clause concerns.
-
The court held that the workfare program and its administration did not violate the Constitution or Brogan's civil rights, and that adequate state remedies existed for any potential state law claims.
-
The court held that the New Jersey two-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions, N.J.S.A. 2A: 14-2, applies to Section 1983 claims, not the six-year residual statute.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's administrative claim was timely filed because the statutory period for filing was extended by a Sunday and a snow day, and the government failed to provide sufficient evidence of widespread public awareness of the link between the swine flu vac