-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-06
The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and dismissed the federal claims with prejudice, declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-20
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint fails to state a claim under federal and state law due to procedural deficiencies and lack of factual support, and therefore recommended denying the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-22
The court granted in part plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order, finding they demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on their Florida Unauthorized Publication Act claim, a likelihood of irreparable injury, that the equities weighed in their favor, and tha
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-11
The court held that the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies for his federal claims and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-08-06
The court held that a counterclaim for breach of fiduciary duty, arising from different facts and substantially predominating over the FLSA claims, does not fall under the court's supplemental jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-07-28
The court held that a breach of contract claim arising from a private agreement incorporating federal reimbursement rates does not necessarily raise a federal question sufficient for removal to federal court.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-07-15
The court held that the plaintiff's federal claims under the Truth in Lending Act and the FTC Act fail to state a claim, and the breach of contract claim does not arise under federal law. Remaining state law claims are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-11
The court recommended granting the plaintiff's motion for default judgment, finding sufficient basis for claims under the ADA, FHA, and Florida Fair Housing Act, but denied compensatory and punitive damages due to lack of evidence.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-06-30
The court held that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the state law claims after dismissing the federal copyright claim, and therefore dismisses the state law claims without prejudice.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-06-11
The court held that the defendant's counterclaim failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted due to insufficient factual allegations and lack of specificity.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-06-10
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing the procedural and substantive due process claims for failure to allege a protected liberty or property interest.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-06-06
The court recommended dismissal of the action because the plaintiff failed to comply with pleading requirements, establish subject matter jurisdiction, and state a plausible claim for relief.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-02
The court held that the plaintiffs' amended complaint constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading, failing to provide adequate notice of the claims against the defendants, and therefore recommended dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-29
The court granted default judgment for patent and trademark infringement, finding the defendant's admitted actions constituted infringement and that a permanent injunction was warranted.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-27
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff's claims were all state-law based and there was no complete diversity between the parties.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-05-21
State-law claims dismissed on supplemental jurisdiction grounds must be dismissed without prejudice to refiling in state court, not with prejudice; federal claims dismissed on the merits for failure to state a claim under RICO remain dismissed with prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-07
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because his allegations did not establish a constitutional deprivation, lacked required elements for specific claims, and sought relief not available in a civil rights action.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-09
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-08
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.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-04-04
The court held that it should decline supplemental jurisdiction over state and local law claims due to their novelty and predominance, remanding them to state court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-26
The court recommended denying the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the complaint without prejudice because it failed to state a plausible claim for relief under federal law and did not comply with pleading rules.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-01-29
The court held that the plaintiff assented to the arbitration agreement through her conduct, and thus Amtrak's motion to compel arbitration is granted, with the claims against Amtrak stayed pending arbitration.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-01-27
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because the defendants, as private entities, did not act under color of state law, and the complaint was a shotgun pleading.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-12-10
The court held that a guardian ad litem must be appointed for an unrepresented incompetent person upon verifiable evidence of incompetence.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-11-22
The court held that a party must file a disclosure statement even if federal question jurisdiction exists alongside diversity jurisdiction, and that Eckart's and Nielson's statements were deficient.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-11-22
The court held that it lacked ancillary jurisdiction to consider the plaintiffs' reverse corporate piercing claim because it sought to impose liability on a third party not already liable for the original judgment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-10-08
The court recommended denying the plaintiff's motion for default judgment without prejudice, finding that while jurisdiction and liability were sufficiently alleged, the plaintiff failed to provide adequate support for the damages requested.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-10-04
The court denied plaintiff's motion for default judgment because the amended complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted for both the ADA and breach of contract claims, and service issues remained for one defendant.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-09-17
The court held that while federal question jurisdiction existed for the FCRA claim, the claim failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and the court declined supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-12
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint constituted a shotgun pleading, making it impossible to determine which allegations supported which claims, and thus granted the motion to dismiss.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-07-24
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under federal law, dismissing the amended complaint without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-07-19
The court granted the motion to dismiss, finding that most federal claims were time-barred due to failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and dismissed the state law claim for lack of supplemental jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-07-17
The court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claims because the § 1983 claim failed as the defendant was a private entity, and the remaining state law claims lacked diversity jurisdiction as both parties were Florida citizens.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-05-07
The court held that the plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint sufficiently alleged a claim under the Defend Trade Secrets Act, and that supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims was appropriate.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-03-18
The court held that removal was improper because the plaintiff's state-law eviction complaint did not present a federal question, and a defendant's counterclaim cannot establish federal question jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-03-18
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under COGSA or the Pomerene Act, and thus declined supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-01-26
A creditor's stated reason for adverse action under the ECOA is sufficient if it tracks approved sample forms, and falsity of the reason is not grounds for an inadequate notice claim. Federal courts may decline supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims after dismissing fede
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-01-04
The court held that public defenders are not state actors for § 1983 claims, and claims against Lake County defendants failed for lack of policy/custom. Claims against the clerk were dismissed due to quasi-judicial immunity. Some retaliation claims against deputies remain.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-12-13
A former Crowley Maritime employee brought sex trafficking, forced labor, and state tort claims against her employer and her supervisor Blanco alleging he sexually assaulted her during a November 2017 business trip. The District Court denied both defendants' summary judgment moti
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-12-04
The court granted a Temporary Restraining Order, finding plaintiffs had a substantial likelihood of success on their claims for violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act and tortious interference with business relationships, and that irreparable harm would result from disclosure
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-09-29
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
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-07-12
The court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint was deficient and ordered him to file an amended complaint to cure pleading deficiencies, including failure to state claims and shotgun pleading violations.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-03-21
Sanchez challenged a debt collection practice by the law firm Hiday & Ricke and insurance company State Farm, whereby they sought to suspend drivers' licenses of judgment debtors who had already satisfied their liability through required minimum insurance obtained at the time of
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-03-20
The court held that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to resolve an internal dispute over who controls a limited liability company, and therefore denies the motion to strike.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-02-21
The Court must sever and remand a state law worker's compensation retaliation claim because it is non-removable by federal statute.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-01-19
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need under the Eighth Amendment and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law medical negligence claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-11-18
The court granted the motion to transfer venue to the Northern District of Illinois, finding that the first-filed rule and the convenience factors under 28 U.S.C. § 1404 favored transfer.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-08-11
The court held that a public defender does not act under color of state law when performing traditional legal functions, thus barring Section 1983 claims against them. The court also declined supplemental jurisdiction over state law malpractice claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-07-12
The court held that claims against the union's executive board are cognizable under the LMRDA, but claims for breach of the union constitution are not cognizable under the LMRA and supplemental jurisdiction is declined.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-27
The court held that when a plaintiff amends their complaint to remove all federal claims, the federal court loses subject matter jurisdiction and must remand the case to state court.