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

• Ehlert v. Singer
  85 F. Supp. 2d 1269· M.D. Fla.· 1999-12-16 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims under Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Exchange Act, and control person liability claims were dismissed because the statements in the prospectus were forward-looking and accompanied by adequate cautionary langua
• Primerica Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Mitchell
  48 F. Supp. 2d 1363· S.D. Fla.· 1999-01-13 ·cited 3×
  The court affirmed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the defendant's motion to dismiss because the plaintiffs had adequately stated claims for tortious interference, civil conspiracy, unfair competition, and unjust enrichment, and Florida's statute regardi
• Friedman v. S.C. Ins.
  855 F. Supp. 348· M.D. Fla.· 1994-06-08 ·cited 3×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim
  Federal law preempts state law remedies for attorneys' fees and emotional distress damages in breach of contract actions involving policies issued under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968.
• Cherry v. Crow
  845 F. Supp. 1520· M.D. Fla.· 1994-03-07 ·cited 3×·via Motion To Dismiss (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged a third-party beneficiary claim for breach of contract and stated valid claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and that allegations of prior inmate deaths were relevant to establishing policy or custom and should not be stricken.
• Tamiami P'rs v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida
  898 F. Supp. 1549· S.D. Fla.· 1994-02-28 ·cited 3×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim
  The court granted the Miccosukee Tribal Court's motion to dismiss and granted in part and denied in part the remaining defendants' motion to dismiss, finding federal question jurisdiction over challenges to tribal court jurisdiction and actions exceeding sovereign powers.
• Eidson v. Arenas
  837 F. Supp. 1158· M.D. Fla.· 1993-11-10 ·cited 3×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim
  The court held that the defendants, as private actors, did not act under color of state law, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction for the federal claims and pendant jurisdiction for the state claims.
• Moore v. State OF Ind.
  999 F.2d 1125· 7th Cir.· 1993-07-20 ·cited 3×·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 12(B)(6) (Failure To State A Claim)
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend his complaint because the proposed amendments would be futile.
• McWRIGHT v. Alexander
  982 F.2d 222· 7th Cir.· 1992-12-28 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint adequately stated claims under the Rehabilitation Act for failure to accommodate and disparate treatment/impact, and thus the district court erred in dismissing the case.
• Heffernan v. Pac. Dunlop GNB Corp.
  965 F.2d 369· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-05 ·cited 3×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Dismissal
  This case involves a dissent arguing that a jury's award to Danco for tortious interference with advantageous business relationships should be reversed because GNB's actions to collect a debt did not constitute direct or unjustified interference.
• Whelan v. Abell
  953 F.2d 663· D.C. Cir.· 1992-01-17 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the malicious prosecution and abuse of process claims on summary judgment and in barring evidence of lost investment value, but correctly directed a verdict on the breach of fiduciary duty claim.
• Davis v. TXO Prod. Corp.
  929 F.2d 1515· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-11 ·cited 3×·via Rule 12(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P.
  A party does not waive the right to appeal a dismissal of a claim if the claim was already dismissed on its merits and repleading it would be futile. The court also held that the actions of the appellee did not breach an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing under Oklah
• Gerber v. Longboat Harbour N. Condo., Inc.
  757 F. Supp. 1339· M.D. Fla.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 3×
  The court reaffirmed summary judgment on the state action issue but vacated it on other issues, finding genuine disputes of material fact remain.
• Gerber v. Longboat Harbour N. Condo.
  724 F. Supp. 884· M.D. Fla.· 1989-11-17 ·cited 3×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  Judicial enforcement of condominium rules restricting flag display constitutes state action, violating the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and Florida Statute § 718.113(4).
• Wiedemann & Fransen v. Hollywood Marine, Inc.
  811 F.2d 864· 5th Cir.· 1987-02-23 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the alleged tortious interference with a contingent fee agreement was not a maritime tort because its effects were not felt on navigable waters, and Louisiana law, which does not recognize such a cause of action, would apply.
• Jerrold I. Patee, Jr. v. Pac. Nw. Bell Tel. Co.
  803 F.2d 476· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-24 ·cited 3×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Dismissal
  Male employees lack standing under Title VII to bring a claim of sex discrimination based on alleged discrimination against women.
• Dial Corp. v. Encina Corp.
  643 F. Supp. 951· S.D. Fla.· 1986-09-09 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiff had standing and stated valid claims under the Lanham Act and Tariff Act, denying the defendants' motion to dismiss.
• Middleton v. The Hollywood Reporter LLC
  137 F.4th 1287· 11th Cir.· 2025-05-23 ·cited 2×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Dismissal
  The court held that California's one-year statute of limitations applied to the defamation claims, barring the action.
• Ramirez v. The Paradies Shops, LLC
  69 F.4th 1213· 11th Cir.· 2023-06-05 ·cited 2×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that a plaintiff sufficiently pleaded a negligence claim by alleging a special relationship with the defendant and a foreseeable risk of harm from a data breach, but failed to sufficiently plead a breach of implied contract claim.
• Williams v. Toll Bros. Builders
  2021 WL 3200825· Del. Super. Ct.· 2022-07-11 ·cited 2×·via Rule 12(B)(6)
  The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the doctrine of claim preclusion (res judicata). The court found that the current lawsuit arose from the same operative facts as previous dismissed actions, and the plaintiff h
• Dukes Clothing, LLC v. The Cincinnati Ins. Co.
  35 F. 4th 1322· 11th Cir.· 2022-06-06 ·cited 2×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim
  The court held that under Alabama law, "accidental physical loss or accidental physical damage" requires a tangible alteration to the insured property, and the presence of COVID-19 does not constitute such damage.
• UI Techs., Inc. v. Ricoma Int'l Corp.
  2019 WL 418860· S.D. Fla.· 2022-05-26 ·cited 2×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim
  The court held that venue was improper in the Eastern District of New York because the defendants did not have a regular and established place of business there, and therefore granted the motion to transfer the case to the Southern District of Florida.
• Newcome v. Hernando Cnty. Sheriff's Off.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-02-02 ·cited 2×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the Hernando County Sheriff's Office is not a suable entity and dismissed claims against it, while also dismissing various other claims for failure to state a claim or due to shotgun pleading, granting leave to amend.
• Anderson v. Wilco Life Ins. Co.
  17 F.4th 1339· 11th Cir.· 2021-11-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the insurance policy unambiguously grants the insurer discretion to set the current monthly cost of insurance rate, provided it does not exceed the guaranteed monthly rate.
• Hill v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd.
  2021 WL 1648225· S.D. Fla.· 2021-07-26 ·cited 2×
  The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiff failed to adequately plead FMLA interference and retaliation claims due to insufficient notice and lack of specific benefit denial.
• S. Y. v. Naples Hotel Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-04-13 ·cited 2×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged claims under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act and Florida's civil RICO statute, denying the defendants' motion to dismiss.
• Smiledirectclub, LLC v. Tanja D. Battle
  969 F.3d 1134· 11th Cir.· 2020-08-11 ·cited 2×
  SmileDirectClub sued Georgia's Board of Dentistry members, alleging that a rule amendment requiring in-person dental supervision violated federal antitrust law, arguing the Board members were not entitled to state-action immunity under Parker v. Brown. The Eleventh Circuit affirm
• Hucke v. Kubra Data Transfer Ltd.
  2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176218· S.D. Fla.· 2015-11-09 ·cited 2×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that common law claims and FDUTPA claims cannot be premised solely on violations of the Money Transmitter Statute, as the statute does not expressly provide a private right of action or proscribe unfair/deceptive practices.
• In re Chiquita Brands Int'l, Inc.
  792 F. Supp. 2d 1301· S.D. Fla.· 2011-06-03 ·cited 2×
  The court found that the Anti-Terrorism Act does not preclude Alien Tort Statute claims for terrorism by non-U.S. nationals, and that the ATS may recognize claims for terrorism if they meet specific international law criteria.
• Jennings Constr. Servs. Corp. v. ACE Am. Ins.
  783 F. Supp. 2d 1209· M.D. Fla.· 2011-05-10 ·cited 2×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that a claims-made-and-reported insurance policy requires notice of a claim within the policy period as a condition precedent to coverage, and failure to do so precludes coverage regardless of prejudice to the insurer.
• Cyber Zone E-Cafe, Inc. v. King
  782 F. Supp. 2d 1331· M.D. Fla.· 2011-03-22 ·cited 2×
  The court granted the State Attorney's motion to dismiss, finding that prosecutorial immunity, Eleventh Amendment immunity, qualified immunity, and Younger abstention barred the claims against him.
• Robbins v. City of Miami Beach
  769 F. Supp. 2d 1372· S.D. Fla.· 2011-01-20 ·cited 2×
  The court granted in part and denied in part the motions to dismiss, finding that while some assault and battery claims against an officer were dismissed for failure to state a claim, other claims, including excessive force and conspiracy, could proceed.
• Rushing v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
  752 F. Supp. 2d 1254· M.D. Fla.· 2010-11-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Florida Securities Investor Protection Act (FSIPA) does not provide a cause of action for "holding" securities or for a buyer's agent's improper investment selection advice, but that claims for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty are not barred by the
• In re Fla. Cement & Concrete Antitrust Litig.
  746 F. Supp. 2d 1291· S.D. Fla.· 2010-10-12 ·cited 2×·via Rule 12(B)(6)
  The court held that the plaintiffs' allegations, taken as true, were sufficient to state a plausible claim for conspiracy to fix prices under the Sherman Act, thus surviving the motion to dismiss.
• Young v. W. Publ'g Corp.
  724 F. Supp. 2d 1268· S.D. Fla.· 2010-07-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that "legal research" constitutes a permissible use under the Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA), and an authorized recipient of information does not need to independently establish a permissible use for its own activities.
• Bryant v. Mostert
  636 F. Supp. 2d 1303· M.D. Fla.· 2009-07-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the statute of limitations and that the defendant prosecutor was entitled to absolute immunity, while the defendant officers were entitled to qualified immunity.
• King v. State
  650 F. Supp. 2d 1157· N.D. Fla.· 2009-06-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims for Whistle-blower's Act violation and tortious interference could proceed, but claims for negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress were dismissed.
• Steadfast Ins. v. Corporate Prot. Sec. Grp., Inc.
  554 F. Supp. 2d 1335· S.D. Fla.· 2008-03-28 ·cited 2×
  A complaint must plead sufficient factual allegations to establish third-party beneficiary status, including clear intent from both contracting parties, to survive a motion to dismiss.
• In re Paincare Holdings Sec. Litig.
  541 F. Supp. 2d 1283· M.D. Fla.· 2008-02-07 ·cited 2×·via Rule 12(B)(6)
  The court held that the amended complaint sufficiently alleged securities fraud, scienter, and causation, thus denying the motion to dismiss.
• Hames v. City of Miami
  479 F. Supp. 2d 1276· S.D. Fla.· 2007-03-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that claims challenging Florida's appellate procedures were unripe, and federal constitutional claims for First Amendment retaliation, excessive fines, and due process violations failed to state a claim, leading to dismissal of federal claims and declining suppleme
• United States Ex Rel. Feingold v. Palmetto Gov't Benefits Administrators
  477 F. Supp. 2d 1187· S.D. Fla.· 2007-01-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a Medicare carrier is immune from liability for payments certified and disbursed under the Medicare Act, and that the plaintiff failed to plead fraud with the particularity required by Rule 9(b).
• Glover v. USA
  380 F. Supp. 2d 1279· M.D. Fla.· 2005-07-26 ·cited 2×
  Plaintiffs Geneva Glover and James Gillins brought a private action under the Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) statute seeking to recover Medicare expenditures for smoking-related diseases, alleging that defendants Philip Morris USA and Liggett Group committed battery by exposing p
• Law Offs. of David J. Stern, P.A. v. Scor Reinsurance Corp.
  354 F. Supp. 2d 1338· S.D. Fla.· 2005-02-02 ·cited 2×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  A plaintiff's prior suit against an agent does not constitute a binding election of remedies preventing a subsequent suit against an undisclosed principal, and a tortious interference claim is not barred by the economic loss doctrine if it alleges distinct damages and facts from
• Caravello v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
  315 F. Supp. 2d 1346· S.D. Fla.· 2004-04-06 ·cited 2×·via Motion To Dismiss Standard (Rule 12(B)(6))
  The court held that the plaintiff's breach of contract claim for wrongful termination was preempted by the Railway Labor Act (RLA) because it constituted a 'minor dispute' requiring interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement.
• Pace v. Platt
  228 F. Supp. 2d 1332· N.D. Fla.· 2002-08-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the IRS and its employees are immune from suit for claims related to tax assessment and collection, and that plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Hodges v. Buzzeo
  193 F. Supp. 2d 1279· M.D. Fla.· 2002-03-14 ·cited 2×
  The court dismissed counterclaims for breach of contract, tortious interference, and shareholder oppression/breach of fiduciary duty for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
• Gill v. Three Dimension Sys., Inc.
  87 F. Supp. 2d 1278· M.D. Fla.· 2000-02-28 ·cited 2×·via Rule 12(B)(6) Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim
  The court held that it had federal question jurisdiction and supplemental jurisdiction over state claims, but lacked personal jurisdiction over two defendants. The court denied dismissal for most claims but dismissed the mismanagement claim.
• Maggio v. Florida
  56 F. Supp. 2d 1370· M.D. Fla.· 1999-07-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's allegations were sufficient to state a claim for retaliation under the First Amendment against individual defendants and that ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims were not duplicative. Therefore, the motions to dismiss were denied.
• Foxx v. Dalton
  46 F. Supp. 2d 1268· M.D. Fla.· 1999-04-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that most of the plaintiff's claims were barred by res judicata, but claims arising from subsequent wrongs were not. The court also granted the defendant's motion for a change of venue.
• Teldar Commc'ns Network, Inc. v. MCI Commc'ns Corp.
  46 F. Supp. 2d 1324· S.D. Fla.· 1999-03-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a plaintiff must allege a breach of an existing business relationship to state a claim for tortious interference, and that unfair competition claims based on the same allegations should also be dismissed.
• Ball v. Heilig-Meyers Furniture Co.
  35 F. Supp. 2d 1371· M.D. Fla.· 1999-02-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that sexual harassment is actionable under Title VII, but the tort of sexual harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress are not recognized in Florida common law. Negligent retention was dismissed for lack of a foundational duty.