1,198 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,504 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
A district court may dismiss a pro se in forma pauperis complaint as frivolous only if it lacks any "arguable substance in law or fact," and cannot dismiss based on credibility determinations of the allegations.
-
844 F.2d 138·
3d Cir.·
1988-04-18
·cited 18×
Witnesses are entitled to absolute immunity for testimony given at pretrial hearings, and federal courts should stay, rather than dismiss, civil rights claims for damages that cannot be redressed in ongoing state proceedings.
-
The court held that the word 'and' in the antitying provision of 12 U.S.C.A. § 1464(q)(1) should be interpreted disjunctively, and that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim under subsection (1)(B).
-
The court held that while the claim for a non-willful violation is time-barred, material issues of fact exist regarding a willful violation of the ADEA, requiring reversal of summary judgment.
-
The court held that the investor's fraud claim under Rule 10b-5 was properly dismissed because the alleged misrepresentations were not made 'in connection with' the sale of a security, but the investor's claims under the Commodity Exchange Act and for churning were improperly dis
-
Misrepresentations and nondisclosures regarding margin account credit terms are actionable under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, and a private right of action exists under Rule 10b-16.
-
The court held that the trial court erred in denying equitable relief regarding the conditions of confinement and vacated the judgment, remanding for further proceedings.
-
616 F.2d 636·
2d Cir.·
1980-03-03
·cited 18×
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint sufficiently averred that the fictional character was 'of and concerning' her to withstand a motion to dismiss, allowing her the opportunity to develop a full evidentiary record.
-
609 F.2d 372·
9th Cir.·
1979-11-21
·cited 18×
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim for deprivation of federally protected civil rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, as the actions complained of, primarily involving state administrative and consumer protection proceedings, did not constitute a depriv
-
The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing Count I, which alleged due process and equal protection violations regarding the police pension fund, but affirmed the dismissal of Counts II and III, which alleged sex and racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1
-
The court held that dismissal for lack of prosecution was an abuse of discretion when the plaintiff's counsel's absence was due to medical reasons and not contumacious conduct.
-
The court held that the district court improperly dismissed the plaintiff's claims for failure to state a cause of action, as the plaintiff might be able to prove facts supporting his claims, particularly regarding subsequent publications of libelous material.
-
465 F.2d 1212·
6th Cir.·
1972-06-28
·cited 18×
A prosecuting attorney is not absolutely immune from civil liability for acts outside his quasi-judicial capacity, such as deliberate suppression of exculpatory evidence.
-
The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's claims under the Fair Housing Act and Civil Rights Act, finding that the alleged post-acquisition discriminatory conduct by the HOA was actionable.
-
953 F.3d 1278·
11th Cir.·
2020-03-27
·cited 17×
Angela Henderson Williamson challenged Travelport's calculation of her pension benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, claiming the plan administrator improperly computed her final average compensation and months of service, and failed to timely disclose requi
-
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing several counts but allowing others to proceed. The Death on the High Seas Act does not apply, and the defendant cannot contractually limit liability for its own negligence.
-
The court held that the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 requires plaintiffs to plead facts giving rise to a strong inference of scienter, and that the plaintiffs failed to meet this heightened pleading standard.
-
924 F.2d 1161·
1st Cir.·
1991-01-25
·cited 17×
A plaintiff who fails to assert an available alternative basis for federal jurisdiction (like diversity) for related state-law claims in an initial federal action, after the federal claim is dismissed on the merits, is precluded from bringing those state-law claims in a subsequen
-
A conditional commitment letter for a loan does not constitute a binding contract if it is subject to numerous conditions precedent that are not met, and oral assurances contradicting the written terms do not create a binding agreement or support a fraud claim when the party is e
-
The court held that the complaint stated valid claims under CERCLA and RCRA, and that the district court did not err in denying the motion to dismiss.
-
The court held that an employer's refusal to 'bridge' an employee's service to allow them to reach full early retirement benefits, when not provided for in the plan, is an employment decision not subject to ERISA's fiduciary standards.
-
The court held that subscription television (STV) signals, though intended for reception by the public, are not broadcast 'for the use of the general public' when access is restricted to paying subscribers via special equipment, and thus are protected by section 605 of the Federa
-
431 F.2d 1004·
5th Cir.·
1970-08-03
·cited 17×
-
Daewoo Motor America, Inc., a U.S. subsidiary and exclusive distributor of Daewoo vehicles, challenged the dismissal of claims against General Motors and others arising from a Korean bankruptcy reorganization that transferred Daewoo Korea's assets to a new entity (GMDAT), which t
-
The court held that a cruise line cannot be held vicariously liable for the negligence of its ship's doctor under actual agency, but may be liable under apparent agency. A breach of contract claim for safe passage is not supported without an express provision.
-
The court held that while unjust enrichment claims may proceed, claims for lack of informed consent, breach of fiduciary duty, fraudulent concealment, and conversion fail for insufficient pleading.
-
The court denied motions to dismiss fraud, negligent misrepresentation, Florida Franchise Act, and breach of fiduciary duty claims, but dismissed a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing for failure to allege breach of express terms.
-
966 F.2d 292·
7th Cir.·
1992-07-01
·cited 16×
The court held that the complaint sufficiently pleaded a violation of a clearly established constitutional right to survive a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint, alleging he was misled by the EEOC regarding the timeliness of his charge, should have been allowed to proceed, and the case should not have been dismissed at the pleading stage.
-
The court held that plaintiffs' allegations were insufficient to state a claim under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act and that the district court lacked jurisdiction for trademark cancellation without an underlying valid claim.
-
The court held that a prisoner's claims of discrimination in job assignments and retaliation for exercising First Amendment rights stated a claim for relief, while claims regarding property deprivation and inadequate grievance procedures were properly dismissed.
-
The dissenting judge concludes that the plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to establish a "special relationship" between the police and herself, and therefore the police had no constitutional duty to protect her.
-
The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding probable cause for the arrest.
-
634 F.2d 127·
3d Cir.·
1980-11-17
·cited 16×
The court held that the district court erred by converting a motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment without providing adequate notice and opportunity for the opposing party to present materials.
-
573 F.2d 429·
7th Cir.·
1978-03-02
·cited 16×
A landowner has no duty to protect invitees against criminal attacks occurring on a public street, even if the landowner uses the street as an extension of its premises and is aware of prior criminal activity in the area.
-
The court held that a pro se inmate's complaint alleging deprivation of constitutional rights, even if inartfully pleaded, is sufficient to withstand dismissal if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling him to relief.
-
The court held that the tenant's complaint failed to factually plead a denial of administrative due process, even if a hearing was required.
-
Government officials acting within the scope of their duties and authority are immune from personal liability for actions taken in their official capacity, even if motivated by malice.
-
619 F. Supp. 2d 1225·
M.D. Fla.·
2008-12-16
·cited 15×
The court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged claims for malicious prosecution against Ferguson and a supervisory liability claim against Nieman, but failed to state claims for excessive force and conspiracy against Ferguson and Bowlin.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs sufficiently alleged a RICO enterprise and predicate acts of mail and wire fraud, allowing those claims to proceed.
-
A plaintiff cannot recover under RICO for a decrease in property value or loss of use and enjoyment; only concrete financial losses to business or property are compensable.
-
829 F.2d 10·
6th Cir.·
1987-09-22
·cited 15×
The court held that the plaintiff's claim of injury due to the employer's failure to provide adequate security, despite knowledge of prior robberies, did not rise to the level of an intentional tort and was therefore barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the Michigan Worker
-
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations of stigmatization and damage to his reputation were sufficient to state a claim for a liberty interest violation under § 1983, even though he failed to request a name-clearing hearing.
-
32 F.4th 1347·
11th Cir.·
2022-05-05
·cited 14×
The Eleventh Circuit held that under Florida law, COVID-19-related business losses do not constitute "direct physical loss of or damage to" property required to trigger coverage under commercial all-risk insurance policies, because the virus caused no tangible alteration to the i
-
The court held that venue was improper in the Southern District of Florida because the defendants' alleged tortious conduct did not occur there, and ordered the case transferred to the Northern District of Georgia.
-
141 F. Supp. 2d 1349·
M.D. Fla.·
2001-03-26
·cited 14×
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff's domicile was previously determined in a related case, and the plaintiff failed to allege facts showing redressable harm for his legal malpractice claims.
-
The court held that it had personal jurisdiction over the defendants and that the complaint stated a claim for professional negligence, denying the motion to dismiss. The court also denied the motion to strike punitive damages claims, pending further Eleventh Circuit review.
-
The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of certain claims and grant of summary judgment, finding no pattern of racketeering activity sufficient for a civil RICO claim.
-
The court held that a district court's consideration of matters outside the pleadings on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is reversible error unless harmless, and that witnesses have absolute immunity from civil liability for conspiracy to present perjured testimony.
-
The court held that while Westinghouse was not a statutory seller under § 12(2) because it sold to plaintiffs' seller, plaintiffs may be allowed to replead their claim based on solicitation if they can allege facts showing Westinghouse was motivated by financial interest in solic