Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss

1,198 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,504 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Blake v. Dierdorff
  856 F.2d 1365· 9th Cir.· 1988-09-08 ·cited 5×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(B)(6) (Failure To State A Claim)
  The court held that a single scheme can satisfy RICO's pattern requirement, but affirmed dismissal for defendants who did not allege sufficient predicate acts or failed to plead fraud with particularity.
• Manze v. State Farm Ins. Co. Appeal of Manze
  817 F.2d 1062· 3d Cir.· 1987-05-04 ·cited 5×·via Motion To Dismiss (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6))
  A plaintiff's timely notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) precludes the court from subsequently dismissing the action with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2), and an order appointing an arbitrator is final and appealable if it grants full relief.
• Livingston v. United States Dep't of Just.
  759 F.2d 74· D.C. Cir.· 1985-03-29 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court erred by adjudicating the merits of an expungement case that should have been transferred to a more convenient forum and by misapplying the law regarding expungement of arrest records.
• Corkery v. SuperX Drugs Corp.
  602 F. Supp. 42· M.D. Fla.· 1985-02-01 ·cited 5×·via Motion To Dismiss (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) fails for lack of a sufficiently defined class, but ERISA claims are not time-barred and the emotional distress claim is viable. The defamation claim also survives dismissal.
• Olen C. Faulk v. City OF Orlando
  731 F.2d 787· 11th Cir.· 1984-05-07 ·cited 5×·via Rule 12(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P.
  The court held that a pro se plaintiff's complaint, when construed liberally and considered in its entirety, stated claims against the City for racial discrimination under Title VII and Section 1981, but not against individual defendants.
• Temistocles Ramirez de Arellano v. Caspar W. Weinberger
  724 F.2d 143· D.C. Cir.· 1983-12-22 ·cited 5×
  The court held that while the case is not a nonjusticiable political question, injunctive and declaratory relief are inappropriate due to foreign affairs concerns and the availability of monetary relief under the Tucker Act.
• United States v. Lannon E. Miller
  645 F.2d 473· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-20 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the False Claims Act complaints against the developers because the allegations of false statements regarding buyer affordability sufficiently pleaded causation for subsequent defaults, but correctly dismissed the claim ag
• Barnes v. Am. Bankers Ins. Co. of Fla.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' lawsuit was filed outside the one-year limitations period triggered by a partial denial of their flood insurance claim.
• Kane v. Select Med. Corp.
  751 F. Supp. 3d 1293· M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Second Amended Complaint is dismissed as a shotgun pleading and fails to plead False Claims Act claims with the particularity required by Rule 9(b), but grants the relator one final opportunity to amend.
• Pipkins v. City of Hoover
  134 F.4th 1163· 11th Cir.· 2025-04-17 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Dismissal
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment, holding that Officer Alexander's use of deadly force was objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and that the mall defendants owed no duty to the decedent under Alabama law.
• Brannigan v. Anthem Ins. Cos., Inc.
  2019 WL 5393817· M.D. Fla.· 2019-10-10 ·cited 4×
  The court granted the motion to dismiss because the plaintiff failed to establish statutory standing and failed to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
• Witoyer v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2016-02-04 ·cited 4×
  A cruise line's contractual duty for shore excursions is not limited by the same 'safe passage' warranty as contracts of carriage, and agency is a factual question not determined by contract labels.
• MSP Recovery, LLC v. Progressive Select Ins.
  S.D. Fla.· 2015-04-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while Medicare Advantage Organizations can sue under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, the plaintiff failed to state a claim because it did not allege that the defendant's responsibility to pay had been demonstrated.
• Small v. Amgen, Inc.
  2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28904· M.D. Fla.· 2014-03-06 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the Fourth Amended Complaint did not constitute a shotgun pleading and that plaintiffs had plausibly stated claims for strict liability (design defect and failure to warn), breach of express warranty, and negligence, but dismissed the negligence claim to the e
• Lazarre v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
  780 F. Supp. 2d 1330· S.D. Fla.· 2011-06-23 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the plaintiff's allegations were sufficient to state a plausible claim for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) sections 1681e(b) and 1681i(a), thus denying the defendant's motion to dismiss.
• Gavron v. Weather Shield Mfg., Inc.
  819 F. Supp. 2d 1297· S.D. Fla.· 2011-05-11 ·cited 4×
  A plaintiff need not allege reliance on misrepresentations to state a claim under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA), nor must a plaintiff allege the defendant's subjective knowledge of defects.
• Hobirn, Inc. v. Aerotek, Inc.
  787 F. Supp. 2d 1298· S.D. Fla.· 2011-03-31 ·cited 4×
  A defendant's motion to dismiss is denied because the compulsory counterclaim rule does not bar claims that had not accrued when the prior action's responsive pleading was due, and the economic loss rule does not preclude claims for fraudulent inducement or negligent hiring.
• Haddad v. Dudek
  784 F. Supp. 2d 1308· M.D. Fla.· 2011-03-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that unjustified institutional isolation of individuals with disabilities constitutes discrimination under the ADA, and public entities must provide reasonable modifications, including community-based services, when appropriate and feasible.
• Berg v. Merchs. Ass'n Collection Div., Inc.
  586 F. Supp. 2d 1336· S.D. Fla.· 2008-10-31 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that a debt collector's pre-recorded voicemail messages left at a debtor's residence, which could be overheard by third parties, state a plausible claim under the FDCPA and FCCPA, and that such an interpretation does not violate the First Amendment.
• Porcelli v. OneBeacon Ins. Co., Inc.
  635 F. Supp. 2d 1312· M.D. Fla.· 2008-07-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss should be denied because the complaint sufficiently alleged a cause of action for insurer bad faith and the Civil Remedy Notice was adequate.
• Rumler v. Dep't of Corr.
  546 F. Supp. 2d 1334· M.D. Fla.· 2008-04-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a plaintiff alleging retaliation under the ADA in an employment context is entitled to seek compensatory and punitive damages and a jury trial. The court also found that the plaintiff's notice letter regarding her state law claim was untimely.
• Eldeeb v. Chertoff
  619 F. Supp. 2d 1190· M.D. Fla.· 2007-07-30 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6)
  The court held that the jurisdictional bar under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) does not preclude review of the agency's alleged unreasonable delay in adjudicating an I-485 application, as such delay may render the decision non-discretionary.
• Schultz v. Applica Inc.
  488 F. Supp. 2d 1219· S.D. Fla.· 2007-02-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while some allegations of scienter were adequately pleaded against Applica and Schulman regarding improper revenue recognition, claims against other defendants and regarding inventory write-downs were dismissed. Certain forward-looking statements were protecte
• BP Prods. N. Am., Inc. v. Super Stop 79, Inc.
  464 F. Supp. 2d 1253· S.D. Fla.· 2006-12-07 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim
  The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss, finding that enforcing forum selection clauses in promissory notes would lead to piecemeal litigation and inconsistent judgments, and that claims against a guarantor were not premature.
• Doe v. Faerber Ex Rel. Estate of Faerber
  446 F. Supp. 2d 1311· M.D. Fla.· 2006-08-14 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently stated claims for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Title IX against the School Board, and a negligence claim against Mrs. Faerber as a landowner, thus denying in part and granting in part various motions to dismiss.
• Wilson v. De Angelis
  156 F. Supp. 2d 1335· S.D. Fla.· 2001-06-27 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the economic loss rule bars claims for fraud and negligent misrepresentation against U.S. Coin, but allows amendment for fraudulent inducement, and denies dismissal for RICO, unjust enrichment, and rescission claims against De Angelis and U.S. Coin.
• In re Physician Corp. of Am. Sec. Litig.
  50 F. Supp. 2d 1304· S.D. Fla.· 1999-02-18 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss the consolidated and amended complaint, finding that the plaintiffs had sufficiently pleaded claims for violations of securities laws.
• Baydar v. Renaissance Cruises, Inc.
  35 F. Supp. 2d 916· S.D. Fla.· 1999-01-08 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6)
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate sufficient contacts between the defendant and the United States to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction over the Jones Act claim.
• Marshall Cnty. Health Care Auth. v. Shalala
  988 F.2d 1221· D.C. Cir.· 1993-03-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a district court can properly consider the merits of an agency action on a motion to dismiss when the issue is purely legal, and that the Secretary's decision not to grant exceptions to Medicare reimbursement classifications is reviewable under the APA.
• Ring v. First Interstate Mortg., Inc.
  984 F.2d 924· 8th Cir.· 1993-01-28 ·cited 4×
  A complaint alleging a Fair Housing Act violation need not plead the elements of a prima facie case, as that is an evidentiary standard, not a pleading standard.
• Decker v. IHC Hosps., Inc.
  982 F.2d 433· 10th Cir.· 1992-12-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that neither the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) nor the Utah Medical Practice Act (Utah MPA) provides immunity from suit, and therefore, the district court's denial of the defendants' motions to dismiss based on these statutes is not immediately appeal
• Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp. v. Catellus Dev. Corp.
  976 F.2d 1338· 9th Cir.· 1992-10-08 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P.
  A party can be held liable under CERCLA as an 'operator' if they had authority to control the cause of contamination during disposal, and liability as a 'transporter' can extend to on-site dispersal of hazardous substances.
• ASH Creek Mining Co. v. Lujan
  969 F.2d 868· 10th Cir.· 1992-07-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Ash Creek Mining Company lacked Article III standing to challenge the federal coal exchange because its alleged injuries were not redressable by a favorable court decision.
• Concerned Citizens OF Neb. (CCN) v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n (NRC)
  970 F.2d 421· 8th Cir.· 1992-07-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction over statutory challenges to NRC regulations, but had jurisdiction over constitutional claims. The court affirmed the dismissal of Supremacy Clause, Ninth Amendment, and Equal Protection claims.
• In re Ulyssus George Wade
  969 F.2d 241· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-30 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's decisions granting summary judgment and dismissing claims related to the Wades' FOIA requests, finding no genuine issue of material fact and that the government properly invoked statutory exemptions.
• Phoenix Eng'g, Inc. v. Mk-Ferguson OF OAK Ridge Co., Knoxville Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council, AFL-CIO
  966 F.2d 1513· 6th Cir.· 1992-06-11 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the Project Labor Agreement did not violate the National Labor Relations Act or the Competition in Contracting Act, affirming the dismissal of the plaintiffs' complaint.
• TV Commc'ns Network, Inc. v. Turner Network Television, Inc.
  964 F.2d 1022· 10th Cir.· 1992-05-19 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Dismissal
  The court held that a plaintiff must plead sufficient facts to support antitrust claims, including a properly defined relevant market, and that a company cannot monopolize or attempt to monopolize the market for its own product.
• Jackson v. City OF Beaumont Police Dep't
  958 F.2d 616· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the officers' Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss by improperly conflating the standards for dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d), and that the plaintiff failed to meet the heightened pleading requirements for q
• Mertens v. Hewitt Assocs.
  948 F.2d 607· 9th Cir.· 1991-11-04 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim
  The court held that former employees could not bring claims against an ERISA plan's actuary for breach of fiduciary duty or knowing participation in a breach, but reversed the dismissal of their state law professional malpractice claim, finding the statute of limitations issue pr
• Hous. Opportunities Made Equal, Inc. v. The Cincinnati Enquirer, Inc.
  943 F.2d 644· 6th Cir.· 1991-09-05 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6))
  A complaint alleging a violation of the Fair Housing Act based on the single publication of an advertisement using a small number of all-white models, or based on an aggregate message from multiple unrelated advertisements, does not state a cognizable claim without more.
• Ann v. Garrett and Roy D. Garrett
  938 F.2d 591· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-12 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Dismissal
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal because the plaintiffs' complaint did not, on its face, establish that their claims were barred by the D'Oench, Duhme doctrine or 12 U.S.C. § 1823(e).
• Arcade Water Dist. v. United States
  940 F.2d 1265· 9th Cir.· 1991-08-01 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Dismissal
  The court held that Arcade Water District stated a claim for a continuing nuisance, which is not time-barred under the FTCA statute of limitations.
• Richards v. Bellmon
  941 F.2d 1015· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-19 ·cited 4×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(B)(6) Dismissal Standard
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint and that the case should be remanded for further proceedings consistent with supervening authority.
• Turbe v. Gov't OF THE Virgin Islands
  938 F.2d 427· 3d Cir.· 1991-07-11 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6))
  The court held that a public utility's failure to repair street lights does not create a legal duty to protect individuals from criminal attack, absent a special relationship or circumstances where the failure increased the risk of harm or caused detrimental reliance.
• Montgomery v. United States
  933 F.2d 348· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-17 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the quiet title action because 28 U.S.C. § 2410 does not waive sovereign immunity for challenges to the underlying tax assessment, and the IRS presented sufficient evidence of compliance with procedural requirements for se
• Del. Valley Citizens Council FOR Clean AIR v. Davis
  932 F.2d 256· 3d Cir.· 1991-05-06 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Dismissal
  The court held that claims alleging direct violations of the Clean Air Act's statutory provisions, rather than violations of an existing emission standard or limitation within an approved plan, must be brought as petitions for review in the courts of appeals under § 7607, not as
• Fleming v. Lind-Waldock & Co.
  922 F.2d 20· 1st Cir.· 1990-12-19 ·cited 4×·via Motion To Dismiss (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6))
  The court held that an equity receiver lacks standing to assert claims on behalf of investors, intervention was untimely, and there is no federal statutory or equitable right to contribution under the Commodity Exchange Act.
• Layton v. United States
  919 F.2d 1333· 8th Cir.· 1990-11-28 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim
  The court held that the district court erred by converting a motion to dismiss into a summary judgment motion without providing the parties an opportunity to respond, and by improperly applying Arkansas' assumption of risk doctrine as a complete bar to recovery.
• Hernandez v. Denton
  919 F.2d 573· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-21 ·cited 4×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(B)(6) Dismissal Standard
• Awilda Arroyo-Torres v. Ponce Fed. Bank
  918 F.2d 276· 1st Cir.· 1990-11-06 ·cited 4×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Dismissal
  The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that no implied private right of action exists under the CTRA or 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2) for an employee discharged for cooperating with a federal investigation.