1,198 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,504 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-11-14
Aaron Rothenberg, a former commercial truck driver, sued Swift Transportation, Walmart, Costco, and Target alleging they engaged in a years-long conspiracy to assault, defame, and harass him through employees screaming false accusations, making threats, and invading his privacy.
-
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss and strike, dismissing Counterclaim I and III without prejudice, denying dismissal of Counterclaim II, and treating Affirmative Defense 13 as a denial.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-11-06
The court held that Counts I and III of the amended complaint constitute impermissible shotgun pleadings because they commingle multiple distinct causes of action within a single count, requiring dismissal.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as his false arrest claim was barred by his nolo contendere plea and his excessive force claim did not allege facts beyond de minimis force.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state plausible claims for relief in his complaint, as the allegations were too conclusory and lacked specific factual support.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for relief under Title VII, the FCRA, or COBRA, warranting dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-11-01
A prisoner's claim against a doctor for alleged falsification of medical records and failure to issue a medical pass for a walker does not state a plausible Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-11-01
The court held that the plaintiff plausibly alleged that the defendant acted as a motor carrier, not merely a broker, and thus stated a claim under the Carmack Amendment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-10-26
The court held that the plaintiff's state law claims for breach of contract and negligent bailment were preempted by federal law governing common carriers.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-10-24
The court held that the pro se plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies and did not state a claim against the supervisor, warranting dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-10-19
The court held that the amended complaint failed to state a plausible claim under the FCRA because the alleged inaccurate Social Security Numbers do not constitute 'consumer report' information and the plaintiff failed to adequately plead a request for disclosure.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-10-17
A company's stock repurchases cannot be attributed to its insider under 15 U.S.C. § 78p(b) when the insider did not directly conduct the transaction, as the statute distinguishes between the issuer and the insider.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-10-17
The court held that Count IV of the complaint, alleging vicarious liability, was duplicative of direct liability claims in Counts I and II and therefore dismissed it with prejudice.
-
The Court denied the motion to dismiss the certiorari complaint, finding the claim was not time-barred due to exceptional circumstances arising from procedural ambiguity and lack of prejudice. The Court also denied the argument that Middlecap failed to exhaust administrative reme
-
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing Count Two without prejudice for redundancy but allowing Counts One and Three to proceed.
-
The court held that leave to amend the complaint should be granted because the proposed amended complaint was not clearly futile, and the motion to dismiss was therefore denied as moot.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-10-10
A letter of intent that lists terms but requires further negotiation on essential elements is an unenforceable agreement to agree, not a binding contract.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-10-05
The court held that the complaint was a shotgun pleading and the libel claim was insufficiently pleaded, but granted leave to amend.
-
The court held that the Sheriff's Office is not a suable entity, official capacity claims against deputies are duplicative, and false arrest and malicious prosecution claims are barred by Heck v. Humphrey because they would necessarily imply the invalidity of the plaintiff's conv
-
The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint stated a plausible claim for relief under RESPA and Regulation X, thus denying the defendant's motion to dismiss.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's pro se complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and was due to be dismissed without prejudice.
-
The court held that a pro se plaintiff's complaint, which lacked specific factual allegations and clarity regarding claims against defendants, failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-10-04
The court held that Counts II and III of the Second Amended Complaint failed to state a claim and were dismissed. Defendant Garris's joinder motion was denied as untimely.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-10-03
The court held that the plaintiff's state-law negligence and wrongful death claim is preempted by the Montreal Convention because the injury occurred during international air travel.
-
The Delaware Court of Chancery dismissed a stockholder derivative complaint for failure to plead demand futility. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to allege particularized facts demonstrating that a majority of the board of directors faced a substantial likelihood of li
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-30
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for disparate impact discrimination due to a lack of statistical evidence and that several claims were barred for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-29
The court held that all of the plaintiff's claims were barred under Heck v. Humphrey because a favorable ruling would necessarily imply the invalidity of his federal conviction, and alternatively, the claims were meritless and officers were protected by qualified immunity.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-29
The court held that the use of force by Deputy Edge was not constitutionally excessive, and therefore, the defendants are entitled to summary judgment.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead that the defendants acted as unregistered brokers or dealers under the Exchange Act, and thus Count IV is dismissed with prejudice. Remaining state law claims are dismissed without prejudice due to lack of federal quest
-
The court held that Count III of the amended complaint fails to state a claim for fraud, invasion of privacy, and certain statutory violations due to insufficient pleading and lack of private right of action.
-
The Court of Chancery denied in part and granted in part the defendant's motion to dismiss. The court held that the Securities Purchase Agreement (SPA) did not bar the plaintiff's fraud claims because it lacked clear and unambiguous anti-reliance language and expressly carved out
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-28
Surgret Doss sued several law enforcement officials and the City of Tampa, alleging conspiracy and malicious prosecution after a judge referred him to police for potential perjury during a foreclosure dispute, leading to his arrest and prosecution. The district court dismissed mo
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for false arrest or malicious prosecution because he did not allege a lack of probable cause for his arrest and his prosecution had not terminated in his favor.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for relief under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's claims failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and were therefore dismissed.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for default judgment against all defendants because the motion failed to address prior court orders and contained numerous deficiencies in pleading and proof.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-21
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state plausible claims for relief under the First, Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments, and dismissed the complaint.
-
The court held that the pro se plaintiff stated a prima facie deliberate indifference claim against some defendants but dismissed the complaint without prejudice due to procedural defects, granting leave to amend.
-
The court granted in part and denied in part the motions to dismiss, finding some claims sufficiently pleaded while others were barred by statute or doctrine.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was a "shotgun pleading" and dismissed it without prejudice, granting leave to amend.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-09-18
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient facts to establish actual or constructive fraud, or aiding and abetting fraud and breach of fiduciary duty, against the bank.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-09-18
The court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss, finding the complaint adequately pled claims for negligent and fraudulent misrepresentation.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-18
The court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations should be denied because it was not apparent from the face of the complaint that the claim was time-barred.
-
The court held that claims against Doyle are dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to Eleventh Amendment immunity, and claims against Guinand are dismissed with prejudice based on absolute immunity. Claims against Rives are dismissed for failure to state a plausib
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and dismissed the fourth amended complaint with prejudice.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-09-12
The court held that claims acquired after the statutory cutoff date are barred, but scienter and other defenses were sufficiently pleaded to survive dismissal.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-09-10
The court accepted the magistrate judge's report, dismissing the Section 1983 claim against the individual officer but allowing the Section 1983 claim against the county to proceed on a failure-to-train theory for the second arrest.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-08
The court held that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not recognize a cause of action for general retaliation, thus the plaintiff failed to state a claim.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-08
The court held that Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity bars the § 1983 and breach of contract claims, and the Title IX claim fails for lack of plausible allegations of gender bias.
-
The court denied defendants' motions to dismiss, finding that plaintiffs sufficiently stated claims for trade secret misappropriation and that the litigation privilege and res judicata did not bar the action at this stage, but dismissed TCA claims as shotgun pleading.