1,198 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,504 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
The court held that the pro se prisoner's complaint, alleging failure to protect from an inmate attack, was dismissed for failing to state a claim and naming improper defendants, but was granted leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-10
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations, if true, state a plausible claim for deliberate indifference under the Eighth Amendment, and thus the defendant is not entitled to dismissal or qualified immunity at this stage.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-09
The court held that the plaintiffs' breach of insurance contract claim was barred by the statute of limitations because it was filed more than one year after the insurer's partial denial of the claim.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-04-09
The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead FLSA coverage because the complaint lacked specific factual allegations about his work and the employer's business, despite alleging misclassification as an exempt employee.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-09
The court held that the plaintiff adequately pleaded FLSA coverage, individual liability for Kajy, and failure to pay overtime, but failed to adequately plead willfulness for the three-year statute of limitations.
-
The court held that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claims due to failure to state a claim, lack of federal question jurisdiction, and failure to establish diversity jurisdiction.
-
The Delaware Superior Court granted in part and denied in part Medtronic's motion to dismiss Elutia's breach of contract claims. The court dismissed Elutia's claim for breach of the insurance provision (Count I) as time-barred, finding the continuing breach doctrine inapplicable.
-
The Delaware Superior Court granted in part and denied in part Medtronic's motion to dismiss Elutia's breach of contract claims. The court held that Elutia's claim for breach of the insurance provision (Count I) was time-barred because the continuing breach doctrine did not apply
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction and failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, warranting dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-08
The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to review the plaintiff's challenge to his prior state court conviction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and that other claims fail to state a claim or are time-barred.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-04-08
Jaden Rashada sued University of Florida football coach William Napier, NIL director Marcus Castro-Walker, booster Hugh Hathcock, and Velocity Automotive Solutions for fraudulently inducing him to commit to the university with promises of a $13.85 million name, image, and likenes
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-04-07
The court held that the defendants are entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity, and thus the plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because his allegations of cell door rattling did not establish an objective substantial risk of serious harm or a sufficiently culpable state of mind, nor did he allege official policy as the moving
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because his allegations were conclusory, failed to establish a constitutional deprivation, and did not meet the requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
-
A lawsuit under the National Flood Insurance Act must be filed within one year of the initial partial denial of a claim, and subsequent submissions of supplemental proofs of loss do not restart or toll the limitations period. The limitations period was triggered by the November 1
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-04
A lawsuit under a Standard Flood Insurance Policy is time-barred if not filed within one year of the insurer's partial denial of the claim, even if the policyholder later submits a supplemental proof of loss.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2025-04-03
The court granted Blackbaud's motion to dismiss the amended complaints, finding that the plaintiffs failed to adequately plead subrogation claims and breach of contract. The court held that the plaintiffs, as subrogees, did not provide sufficient Insured-specific factual allegati
-
The court held that issuing written reprimands, which had no effect on employment terms or conditions, did not constitute an adverse employment action, and therefore the plaintiff's opposition to issuing them was not protected activity.
-
The Court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged notice of the dangerous condition through the presence of a warning sign, thus denying the motion to dismiss.
-
The court held that the prisoner's complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted due to various deficiencies, including improper defendants and failure to meet legal standards for constitutional claims.
-
The court held that the defendant deputy sheriff is not entitled to qualified immunity for ordering an investigatory strip search without reasonable suspicion, and that a violation of Florida Statute § 901.211 can form the basis for a common law negligence claim.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state plausible claims for ADA violations, First Amendment retaliation, and Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference, but granted leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-26
The court held that the federal enclave doctrine bars claims based on post-cession state statutes, but a breach of contract claim is permissible under pre-cession law, and negligence claims are not time-barred by recent statutory amendments.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-26
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) and Tortious Interference with a Custodial Parent-Child Relationship because the alleged conduct did not meet the required legal standards.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-26
The court granted Defendant GGH's motion to dismiss equitable claims (Counts VI and VII) because an express contract governed the subject matter, but denied the Beckett Defendants' motion to dismiss, allowing Plaintiff to proceed with claims for breach of implied-in-fact contract
-
The court affirmed the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting in part and denying in part the motion to dismiss, and dismissing the plaintiff's amended complaint with prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-21
State Farm sued healthcare defendants for allegedly operating an unlawful patient brokering scheme in which Spine Centers referred patients to surgeons and surgery centers while submitting inflated bills to insurers that far exceeded what the referred parties actually received, w
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-03-17
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act because it did not plausibly allege that the account in question was a type covered by the EFTA.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-17
The court denied the motion to dismiss, finding a justiciable controversy existed and that consolidation of the actions would resolve the issue of duplication.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-13
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing the Section 1983 malicious prosecution and defamation claims with leave to amend, but allowing the false arrest, state law malicious prosecution, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims
-
The court held that plaintiffs have plausibly alleged unreasonable delay in the adjudication of their asylum application under the APA, and thus denied the motion to dismiss those claims.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim and is subject to dismissal under the PLRA and Younger abstention doctrine.
-
The court held that affirmative defenses directed at unpled claims or that are merely conclusory should be stricken, while those that function as denials should be treated as such rather than stricken.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-10
A claim for bad faith against an insurer is not premature when the underlying claim has been settled, even if the insured disputes the obligation to reimburse the insurer for the settlement amount.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-03-10
The court held that the plaintiff plausibly alleged direct and contributory copyright infringement but failed to adequately plead a trade secret misappropriation claim, granting leave to amend that count.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for negligence because Florida law does not impose a duty on banks to investigate transactions, and the plaintiff failed to plead facts demonstrating procedural or substantive unconscionability in the banking agreements.
-
The court recommended granting the motion to dismiss because the plaintiff failed to adequately allege that the defendant had notice of the dangerous condition, but granted leave to amend the complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-06
The court held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity, thus dismissing the federal claims and declining supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's claims for quiet title, fraud, securities violations, and recoupment/disgorgement failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and were dismissed.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-04
The court held that Epoch has standing as a real party in interest and sufficiently alleged equitable title, but dismissed Epoch's per se takings claim because the property retained some economic value.
-
The court held that the insurer's claim for a declaratory judgment on its duty to defend is ripe and may proceed, but the claim for a declaratory judgment on its duty to indemnify is not ripe and is dismissed without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-28
The court held that a hash match to 'apparent CSAM' triggers reporting responsibilities under the PROTECT Act, and providers are immune from claims arising from such reports, unless exceptions apply. However, a hash match to 'unconfirmed' CSAM may not trigger mandatory reporting.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-27
A motor carrier that subcontracts a shipment is not acting as an unlawful broker under the MAP-21 Act, as the Act distinguishes between brokers and motor carriers.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-26
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss the counterclaim, striking the jury trial demand but allowing amendment for certain claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-26
The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded an Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against the defendant in his individual capacity, but claims against the defendant in his official capacity are barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity.
-
In October 2005, Peter Halmos' yacht ran aground in a marine sanctuary during Hurricane Wilma, and he subsequently entered into settlement agreements with NOAA and another party that included mutual releases and promises not to interfere with each other's legal proceedings. Halmo
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief against most defendants and was dismissed without prejudice.
-
The court held that the deputy had probable cause for the arrest based on a modified exhaust violation and resisting arrest, thus granting qualified immunity and dismissing the § 1983 claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-21
The court held that the insurance policy's plain language unambiguously excluded coverage for flood, surge, and ground water damage, and therefore granted the motion to dismiss.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-02-20
The court held that the plaintiff adequately pleaded copyright infringement and secondary infringement claims, but dismissed state law claims for unjust enrichment and defamation due to preemption or lack of specificity, while leaving the IIED claim against the primary creators f