1,198 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,504 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-10-30
The court held that the officers had probable cause to arrest the plaintiff based on observed actions, thus granting qualified immunity and dismissing the § 1983 claims. State law claims were also dismissed as a result.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-10-29
The court held that the plaintiff's Age Discrimination in Employment Act claim was time-barred because it was filed more than 90 days after receiving notice of the right to sue from the EEOC.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-28
The court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss because the plaintiffs had filed the required notice of intent to initiate litigation, and alternatively, their complaint sufficiently alleged performance of conditions precedent under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(c).
-
The court held that a plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claims are barred by collateral estoppel because the issue of probable cause was fully litigated and decided in a prior state criminal proceeding. The court also recommended declining supplemental jurisdiction over the state law
-
The court recommended dismissal of the action without prejudice because the complaint failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction and did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the complaint without prejudice because it constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and failed to state a claim under many cited statutes, and the motion to proceed in forma pauperis was denied without prejudice.
-
The court held that the plaintiff plausibly alleged a First Amendment retaliation claim against the School Board but dismissed claims against individual defendants for failing to allege adverse employment actions by them.
-
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.·
2025-10-14
The court held that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity because they had arguable reasonable suspicion to detain the plaintiff, and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that his right to be free from such detention was clearly established by binding precedent.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-10-10
The court held that the defendant's counterclaim for interpleader must be dismissed for lack of federal subject-matter jurisdiction because the defendant failed to deposit the disputed funds into the court's registry as required by the federal interpleader statute.
-
The court recommended denying the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the case without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to cure deficiencies in his filing and complaint after being given an opportunity to do so.
-
The court recommends denying the plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the case without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to cure deficiencies in his application and complaint after being given an opportunity to do so.
-
The court held that a denial letter, even if not in the complaint, can be considered on a motion to dismiss if it is central to the claims and its authenticity is undisputed, and that the plaintiffs' suit was untimely.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-07
The court held that the plaintiff's mortgage transaction was exempt from TILA rescission, the plaintiff failed to state a claim under RESPA due to a lack of alleged damages, and the complaint was a shotgun pleading. The court denied the motion to remand and granted the motion to
-
The court held that it has admiralty jurisdiction over the tort claim, but lacks personal jurisdiction over SNAV due to invalid maritime attachments, while Aloschi sufficiently stated a claim for negligence.
-
The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded hostile work environment claims under Title VII and the Florida Civil Rights Act, and a battery claim against the employer based on vicarious liability.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim because it contained only vague and conclusory allegations, not meeting federal pleading standards.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-30
The court held that the first amended complaint suffers from impermissible shotgun pleading, requiring dismissal. Certain Fair Housing Act claims were also dismissed on substantive grounds.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-30
The court held that the Plan's denial of surviving spouse benefits was reasonable and not discriminatory under ERISA, as the plaintiff did not meet the plan's explicit definition of a 'Qualified Spouse'.
-
The Court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss Counts II and III, finding that the Texas Securities Act (TSA) claims were time-barred by the TSA's three-year statute of limitations. The court determined that the TSA's limitations period is substantive and "inseparably interw
-
The court held that the plaintiff has standing for claims related to the Medicare Secondary Payer Act and breach of contract, but lacks standing for claims of fraudulent concealment and declaratory judgment based on excluded claims data.
-
The court held that a motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations cannot rely on extrinsic evidence not present in the complaint, but claims for attorney's fees and a jury demand are precluded by law for flood insurance disputes.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-24
The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss all counts of the complaint for failure to state a claim.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-22
The court held that the plaintiff had standing, the case was ripe, and not moot, denying the defendants' motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-09-22
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for national origin discrimination, retaliation, or hostile work environment because his allegations were too conclusory and lacked specific factual support.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-19
The court held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiff failed to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional right, and the detention was reasonable under the circumstances.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-19
The court held that the defendant detective was entitled to qualified immunity because he had arguable probable cause for the arrest and any alleged misstatements or omissions in the affidavit were not material enough to violate the Fourth Amendment.
-
The court recommended granting the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis because her complaint, despite some deficiencies, contained well-pleaded facts that plausibly stated claims for relief under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
-
The court held that the amended complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and denied the motion for default judgment.
-
The court held that a second amended complaint filed without leave was properly stricken, and that the plaintiff's allegations of a jail officer using fecal matter on handcuffs stated claims for deliberate indifference and excessive force, thus denying qualified immunity at the m
-
The court held that the plaintiff's pro se civil rights complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and thus was dismissed without prejudice.
-
The court held that the venue clause in the senior secured promissory note and security agreement is permissive and does not mandate exclusive venue in Delaware.
-
The court held that a breach of contract claim for failure to defend is not premature, but a common law bad faith claim is premature until coverage is determined.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was a 'shotgun pleading' and dismissed it without prejudice, allowing the plaintiff to file an amended complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-15
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under ERISA, breach of contract, bad faith, unjust enrichment, or negligence, and was also subject to dismissal as a shotgun pleading.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-12
The court held that the plaintiff failed to comply with mandatory pre-suit notice requirements for state law claims and failed to state a claim for Fourth Amendment violations, First Amendment retaliation, civil conspiracy, or a Monell claim.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's third amended complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under Title VII, the ADA, or the FCRA.
-
The Court held that the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint constituted a shotgun pleading and dismissed it, granting leave to amend.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-09-11
The court held that Florida Statute § 768.0427 does not require disclosure of letters of protection as a condition precedent to filing a personal injury complaint.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-09-04
Benessere Investment Group and ARC Global Investments II sued Eric Swider, Alexander Cano, and Renatus Advisors for hacking into their computer systems and misappropriating confidential information about DWAC (a SPAC merging with Trump Media), which Swider allegedly used to orche
-
The Superior Court of Delaware granted the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, finding that the License Agreement was invalid and unenforceable because the Plaintiff corporation did not exist at the time the agreement was executed. Consequently, the court dismissed the breach of contr
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-09-03
The court held that the plaintiff failed to plead sufficient factual matter to plausibly claim he engaged in a statutorily protected activity, as the alleged comments did not mention race or have an implicit connection to it.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-31
The court held that the defendants adequately pleaded inequitable conduct under Rule 9(b) and denied the plaintiff's motion to dismiss and motion to strike.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations, when liberally construed, state plausible claims under the First Amendment, RLUIPA, and the Equal Protection Clause, sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-26
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish standing for injunctive relief and that the complaint constituted a shotgun pleading, but denied dismissal based on failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-08-26
The court held that the complaint's first three counts were impermissible shotgun pleadings and that the fourth count failed to state a claim for municipal liability under § 1983.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2025-08-25
The Court granted the motion to dismiss, finding that the petition for a writ of mandamus sought an equitable remedy outside the Superior Court's authority and that, consequently, the request for a declaratory judgment, even if justiciable, would not serve judicial economy. The C
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-22
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and dismissed it without prejudice, requiring repleader.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-08-21
Nihal Michael Gautam sued the City of Sunrise and multiple police officers under federal civil rights laws and state law, alleging false arrest, excessive force, failure to intervene, municipal liability, civil RICO violations, and violations of Florida's Public Records Act stemm