1,198 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,504 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
A public defender does not act under color of state law for § 1983 claims, and state entities are not liable under respondeat superior or the Eleventh Amendment.
-
The court denied the City of Venice's motion to dismiss Count I, finding the plaintiff sufficiently alleged a municipal custom of racial discrimination and causation.
-
The Delaware Court of Chancery granted the defendants' motion to dismiss a derivative action, finding that the plaintiffs failed to plead with particularity that demand on the board of directors was futile. The court concluded that the allegations did not establish a substantial
-
The court held that the complaint plausibly alleged that the defendant acted as an unregistered securities dealer, and that the claim for injunctive relief was not premature.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-08-10
The court held that the counterclaim sufficiently stated claims for breach of contract and negligence, and denied the motion for a more definite statement.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-08-10
The court held that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently allege that Tegna was his employer or a joint employer, warranting dismissal of the claims against Tegna.
-
The federal court dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, as the plaintiff's claims were inextricably intertwined with a prior state court foreclosure judgment.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-07-30
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for excessive force under the Fourth Amendment and that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity.
-
The amended complaint is dismissed with prejudice because the plaintiff failed to correct the legal deficiencies identified in the initial complaint, despite being given leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-07-27
The court held that plaintiffs' allegations of future harm from a data breach were too speculative to establish Article III standing for prospective relief.
-
The court granted defendants' motions to dismiss and for a more definite statement, dismissing the amended complaint without prejudice.
-
The court granted in part and denied in part IBM's motion to dismiss, and granted MetLife's motion to dismiss, finding that Florida's impact rule barred most of the negligence claims, and that the ERISA claims failed to state a claim.
-
The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently stated a claim for retaliation under the Florida Whistleblower Act but failed to state claims under Title VII and the Florida Civil Rights Act due to untimely administrative filings and pleading defects.
-
Claims related to an ERISA plan are preempted by ERISA, but claims with an independent factual basis may be re-alleged.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-07-23
The court granted the motion to dismiss the Fair Credit Reporting Act claim because the plaintiff failed to allege that the credit furnisher received notice of the dispute from a consumer reporting agency, but granted leave to amend.
-
The court held that the amended complaint sufficiently stated a claim for uninsured/underinsured motorist benefits and properly alleged diversity jurisdiction.
-
A plan participant has statutory standing under ERISA to seek reimbursement for medical expenses paid for a dependent beneficiary, even if the participant did not personally receive the medical services.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's reference to the Fourteenth Amendment was not a separate claim but supported the Fourth Amendment excessive force claim against a state actor.
-
The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged that an employee exceeded authorized access under the CFAA, but failed to adequately allege 'loss' under the statute, and dismissed that count with leave to amend. The court also found the plaintiff sufficiently alleged torti
-
The court held that the Rehabilitation Act claims (Counts II, IV, VI) were insufficient because the plaintiff failed to allege that his disability was the sole reason for the denial of his applications. The court found that the complaint sufficiently alleged plausible claims for
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-07-13
The court held that claims for tortious interference and FDUTPA violations were preempted by Florida's Uniform Trade Secrets Act, but claims for breach of fiduciary duty were not. The court also found the complaint was not a shotgun pleading and that allegations of reasonable ste
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-07-13
The court held that res judicata does not bar claims arising from a settlement agreement's reinstatement provision, and supplemental jurisdiction exists for the breach of contract claim.
-
The court held that a pro se prisoner's complaint alleging wrongful detention and mishandling of grievances fails to state a claim and is dismissed, but with leave to amend.
-
The court held that a defendant's motion to dismiss patent infringement claims should be denied when the plaintiff pleads sufficient facts to state a plausible claim and the defendant fails to meet the burden of proving patent invalidity or insufficient pleading at this early sta
-
The Delaware Supreme Court reversed the Court of Chancery's dismissal of a breach of fiduciary duty claim against CEO John J. Haley, holding that the plaintiffs adequately pleaded that Haley was materially self-interested in the merger due to an undisclosed compensation proposal
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-06-26
The court held that the complaint was a shotgun pleading and dismissed it with leave to amend, and that the Jones Act claim against Great Lakes failed to state a claim.
-
The court held that a prisoner's complaint seeking a name change from a prison warden fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-06-23
The court held that the plaintiff received constitutionally adequate process and that his claims are barred by the availability of adequate state remedies, and that the arbitration claim fails due to lack of jurisdiction and the defendant not being a party to the arbitration agre
-
The court held that a settlement offer, which requires full payment to be effective, does not render the original loan terms inaccurate on a credit report until the offer is fully accepted by performance. The court also found that reporting loan information without a "paying unde
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-06-16
The court held that the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint, including claims for negligence, gross negligence, breach of contract, and breach of implied warranty of workmanlike service, should be denied.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state claims for tortious interference, negligent misrepresentation, and fraud, and dismissed all counts with prejudice.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint failed to state a claim for relief, both for false arrest and excessive force.
-
The court denied defendant Roger Daleiden's motions to dismiss, finding his arguments regarding tax enforcement frivolous and his motions procedurally deficient.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-06-09
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for deliberate indifference under the Eighth Amendment because the defendant prison official acted reasonably by placing the plaintiff in administrative confinement and the attack occurred long after the plaintiff was tran
-
A complaint need not plead facts to negate an affirmative defense like the statute of limitations, and a motion to dismiss is inappropriate when resolution depends on facts not yet in evidence.
-
The court granted judgment on the pleadings for the breach of contract claim because the alleged breach occurred after the settlement agreement's release period, and denied judgment on the tortious interference claim, granting leave to amend due to insufficient factual allegation
-
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations of medical negligence and dissatisfaction with care did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference required for an Eighth Amendment claim under Bivens.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-06-02
The court held that the plaintiff's claims were time-barred by the statute of limitations and that leave to amend would be futile, affirming the dismissal of the case.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-06-02
The court held that a motion to dismiss a counterclaim under Rule 12(b)(6) tests the validity of the claim, not its redundancy, and cannot resolve factual disputes about whether the plaintiff acted as a public adjuster.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-06-02
The court held that a motion to dismiss a counterclaim is evaluated under the same standard as a motion to dismiss a complaint, and the factual question of whether a contractor acted as a public adjuster in violation of Florida law is not appropriately resolved on a motion to dis
-
The Court of Chancery granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss. Counts I, II, VIII, and X were allowed to proceed, while Counts III, IV, V, VI, VII, and IX were dismissed. The court found that while only signatories to the Employment Agreements were bound,
-
Plaintiff Aaron Fruitstone sued Spartan Race Inc., a Massachusetts-based obstacle course race organizer, alleging that it deceived consumers by charging a $14 mandatory "Racer Insurance Fee" marketed as a pass-through cost for third-party accident insurance, when in fact Spartan
-
The court held that while the plaintiff has standing under FDUTPA, the complaint fails to establish causation and the 'trade or commerce' element, warranting dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-05-26
The court held that the defendant official was not entitled to qualified immunity at the pleading stage, but the municipality was not liable under Monell because the alleged violation was a single incident, not a policy or custom.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-05-22
The court held that defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for the use of a K-9 during an arrest, but not for alleged punching and kicking, and that Fourteenth Amendment claims are dismissed.
-
The court denied the motion for a protective order, finding no coercion or misleading conduct in the updated terms of service, and granted leave to replead certain claims in the motion to dismiss.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-05-18
The court held that the plaintiff failed to administratively exhaust his retaliation claim because the alleged retaliatory act occurred after his EEOC filings and was not like or related to the allegations contained therein.
-
The court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, finding that the plaintiff had stated plausible claims for relief on all counts.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need under the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-05-13
The court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss should be denied because the relator adequately pleaded claims under the False Claims Act and Florida False Claims Act with the required particularity.