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 defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiff failed to allege a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. The office's recording policy was deemed reasonable and viewpoint-neutral, and the officers had reasonable suspi
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-11-15
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under the Florida Whistle-blower's Act and for First Amendment retaliation because her disclosures were not statutorily protected expression and her speech was not on a matter of public concern made as a citizen.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-11-14
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for declaratory relief because it did not allege a violation of a cognizable legal right, and the negligence claim was dismissed for failure to adequately allege a legal duty.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-11-12
The court recommended granting the defendant's motion to dismiss because the plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim for relief under the Social Security Act and her claim may be moot.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-11-08
The court held that a Civil Remedy Notice in a third-party bad faith action can demand extra-contractual damages to cure alleged violations, and the insurer's tender of policy limits does not cure the violation if the insured remains exposed to an excess judgment.
-
The Delaware Court of Chancery denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claim for reformation based on mistake, finding that the plaintiffs had sufficiently pleaded a specific prior understanding that differed materially from the executed SAFE agreement. However,
-
The court held that the defendant waived objections to personal jurisdiction and venue by filing an answer, but granted dismissal for failure to state a claim on copyright infringement and conversion counts, granting leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-10-29
The court held that the Sheriff's motion to dismiss should be granted because the plaintiff failed to plausibly allege that the Sheriff's Office had a policy or custom that caused the alleged constitutional violations. The court also found that Dr. Dully's motion to dismiss shoul
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-10-28
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state claims for unjust enrichment, money had and received, negligence, and conversion, and that amendment would be futile for these claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-10-25
The court accepted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting in part the defendant's motion to dismiss, allowing claims under the FDCPA and FCCPA to proceed but dismissing the negligent misrepresentation claim.
-
The court held that a plaintiff must allege a violation of a federal right to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and there is no federal right to police investigation.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately allege actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition (cockroaches) to support her maritime negligence claim.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint sufficiently alleged facts to state claims for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and negligence, thus denying the defendant's motion to dismiss.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim against the supervisory defendants for failure to protect, negligent hiring, or negligent training.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-10-24
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, but sufficiently alleged a claim for promissory estoppel.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-10-24
The court granted defendants' motions to dismiss, dismissing official capacity claims with prejudice and individual capacity claims against supervisors without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-10-24
The court held that official-capacity claims are barred by the Eleventh Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment claim fails for lack of alleging discrimination based on a protected class. A plausible Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference was stated against one office
-
The Court denied the motion to dismiss, finding that Rule 14 permits a third-party claim for negligent procurement of insurance, that the statute of limitations defense requires further factual development, and that arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief are waived.
-
The court recommends granting the motion to dismiss because the complaint is an impermissible shotgun pleading, failing to provide adequate notice of the claims against each defendant.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-10-22
The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged facts to make it plausible that the defendant's failure to hire him was due to his protected activities, thus denying the motion to dismiss.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2024-10-21
The court held that the plaintiff plausibly alleged an Eighth Amendment failure to intervene claim and that defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity or dismissal of punitive damages at this stage.
-
The court held that Defendant's motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) was untimely and its motion for summary judgment was premature.
-
The Delaware Court of Chancery denied the defendants' motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiff had stated reasonably conceivable direct claims for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. The court held that the claims were direct because they alleged interference wit
-
The court held that the plaintiff's federal securities law claims and state law claims for civil theft, conversion, and breach of contract were dismissed for failure to state a claim and failure to meet heightened pleading standards.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-10-18
Plaintiff Ronnie Reed sued Sheriff Thomas Kevin Waters and Jacksonville Sheriff's Office officers alleging they unconstitutionally strip-searched him multiple times on a public street based on unfounded suspicion, without finding any evidence. The court found Reed stated a plausi
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-10-17
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state claims for equal protection, Section 504, Title II, negligence, and FEEA against the School Board due to insufficient allegations of municipal policy, meaningful access denial, breach of duty, or deliberate indifference, but grant
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for an Eighth Amendment violation or an Equal Protection violation, and thus, the remaining claims also fail.
-
The court held that the plaintiff adequately stated claims under RLUIPA and the First Amendment, and that he properly exhausted administrative remedies by completing the prison's grievance procedure, thus denying the motion to dismiss.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was deficient for failure to state a claim and potentially lacking subject matter jurisdiction, but granted the pro se plaintiff an opportunity to amend.
-
The court held that the FLSA claims were time-barred and state law claims were preempted by the FLSA, warranting dismissal.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to plausibly allege the absence of probable cause for his arrest, which is an essential element for a § 1983 false arrest claim.
-
A prisoner who is a three-striker must pay the filing fee at the time of filing and cannot proceed IFP unless under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
-
A securities fraud class action against executives of Cano Health, Inc., a Medicare-focused primary care company, was dismissed for failure to adequately plead a strong inference of scienter as required by securities law, despite allegations that the company prematurely recognize
-
The court recommended dismissal of all counts without prejudice, granting leave to amend, because the complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under TILA, UCC, or breach of contract, and improperly included other statutory claims within the breach of contract count.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-10-01
The court held that the amended complaint sufficiently alleged facts to plausibly state claims for direct and induced patent infringement, thus denying the motion to dismiss.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-30
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, dismissing all counts with prejudice.
-
The court recommended dismissal of the breach of contract and breach of implied covenant claims because the customer agreements allowed the charging of interest on annual fees and the plaintiff failed to identify a contractual term granting discretion over renewals.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs adequately pleaded securities fraud claims, denying the defendants' motion to dismiss.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the application for discovery assistance under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 and denying the respondent's motion to dismiss and motion for stay and costs.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish personal jurisdiction over the Zupnicks and failed to properly allege subject-matter jurisdiction and venue for Specialty Rx, leading to dismissal of the claims against them.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-24
Surgret Doss, representing himself, sued law enforcement officers and the City of Tampa after being charged with perjury based on an indigency application he filed, which charged he did not own property despite owning four properties; he claimed the prosecution lacked probable ca
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-23
The court held that a prisoner's claims of deliberate indifference and failure to train regarding medical treatment and dietary restrictions failed to state a claim under the Eighth Amendment, and claims related to medication were time-barred.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2024-09-20
The Court granted the motion to dismiss Counts I (Breach of Contract), II (Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing as to Employment Contract), V (Conversion), and VI (Declaratory Judgment). The Court denied the motion to dismiss Counts III (Breach of Implied Cov
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-19
The court held that plaintiffs have standing to bring their Fair Housing Act claims, but their claims for segregative effect are dismissed for failure to state a claim. Disparate impact claims require further factual development.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for deliberate indifference against the defendant, as the defendant's responses to grievances showed inquiry rather than deliberate disregard of a serious medical need.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-09-18
The court recommended granting the motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiff failed to establish Article III standing because he did not demonstrate a sufficiently concrete and immediate threat of future injury.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-17
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing most damages claims for failure to state a claim but allowing the policy claims to proceed.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-17
The court held that most damages claims were dismissed for failing to state a claim or for being too vague, but claims against Defendant Masters regarding tobacco suspension and policy claims under RLUIPA and the First Amendment could proceed.
-
The court recommended denying the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claims for compensatory and punitive damages.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-16
The court granted the motion to dismiss, dismissing all counts against General Motors without prejudice due to various pleading deficiencies, including lack of clarity, standing, and failure to state a plausible claim.