1,055 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 2,310 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The Eleventh Amendment bars suits for monetary damages against state officials in their official capacities.
-
A prisoner's failure to properly exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit mandates dismissal of the action, even if an investigation by an Inspector General's office occurred.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-02-27
The court denied the City's motion for attorneys' fees because the plaintiff's § 1983 claim, though unsuccessful, was not frivolous and warranted the court's close attention.
-
The court held that the defendants failed to demonstrate the plaintiff did not exhaust administrative remedies, and that Eleventh Amendment immunity barred official capacity claims for damages.
-
The court held that the officers' use of deadly force was not objectively reasonable and the law was clearly established, thus denying qualified immunity at the dismissal stage. The city's motion to dismiss the wrongful death claim was also denied.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-02-13
A family sued Charlotte County Sheriff Bill Prummell Jr. and four deputy sheriffs after a November 2019 traffic stop during which Deputy Williams kicked Sandra Corbin, breaking her leg, and then delayed medical care. The court granted in part and denied in part multiple motions t
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the complaint and his motion for a court-appointed investigator.
-
Matthew Poulin sought damages for excessive force following his arrest when North Port police officers tasered him multiple times and then released a K-9 dog that repeatedly bit him, causing severe permanent injuries. The court found that while the taser use was reasonable, Offic
-
The court held that claims against Sheriff Hoffman in his official capacity and for supervisory liability are dismissed, but claims against officers for unlawful search and seizure and destruction of evidence in their individual capacities may proceed.
-
The court held that the traffic stop was based on reasonable suspicion and the subsequent order to exit the vehicle was lawful, thus granting summary judgment on the unlawful seizure claims.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because the allegations are conclusory and vague, and fail to establish an official policy or custom as the moving force behind the alleged constitutional deprivation.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's motion to seal the entire case was denied because it failed to meet procedural requirements and establish good cause to overcome the public's presumptive right of access to judicial records.
-
The court held that the pro se complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and was therefore dismissed.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's claims against the judge, public defender, and prosecutor failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted due to immunity doctrines and lack of factual support for conspiracy allegations.
-
The Eleventh Circuit held that unsworn inmate statements not complying with 28 U.S.C. § 1746 cannot be considered as evidence for summary judgment, and affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment and dismissal of claims.
-
The State of Florida is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment in this § 1983 action, and therefore the Court lacks jurisdiction over the Plaintiff's claims.
-
The court granted the motion to dismiss Count I, finding the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim against the City under § 1983.
-
The court held that claims based on the 2017 incident are likely time-barred, and claims against officers Cajuso and Sosa, and for excessive force, false arrest, and equal protection violations against officer Blacio, fail to state a claim or are barred by qualified immunity. Mun
-
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations were insufficient to state a claim for excessive force, and thus granted the defendant's motion to dismiss.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-10-06
The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss the complaint without prejudice, granting leave to amend, because it constituted an impermissible shotgun pleading and failed to state a claim for municipal liability or an equal protection violation.
-
The court held that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's complaint due to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, as the claims are inextricably intertwined with a prior state court judgment.
-
The court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs against the nurse, and thus claims against the employer and supervisor also failed.
-
The court held that the inmate's complaint failed to state a claim for denial of access to the courts because he did not allege an actual injury. The court dismissed the case without prejudice.
-
A federal district court rejected most of the defendants' summary judgment motions and allowed the case to proceed to trial in a civil rights action stemming from John Blessing's arrest at a 2016 Pearl Jam concert, finding genuine disputes of material fact regarding whether polic
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-09-01
The court held that Count I must be dismissed because the plaintiff failed to allege the lack of adequate state remedies and that his resignation was voluntary, not a constructive discharge. However, the court found the stigmatizing statements sufficiently attended the alleged di
-
The court held that the defendants' motions to dismiss based on illegibility and shotgun pleading were denied, as the complaint was legible and stated plausible claims for relief.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under the PLRA and various constitutional amendments.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-08-08
The court found the plaintiff's complaint to be a shotgun pleading, making it impossible to conduct a standing analysis or address the merits of the claims.
-
A civil rights complaint challenging convictions that have not been overturned is subject to dismissal under the PLRA for failure to state a claim.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint, even when liberally construed, failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and was therefore dismissed.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate failed to exhaust administrative remedies as required by the PLRA, and thus his complaint must be dismissed without prejudice and without leave to amend.
-
Absolute prosecutorial immunity does not protect a prosecutor for failing to take action to cancel a material witness warrant after the judicial proceeding has concluded.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and was therefore dismissed.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-07-12
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations of medical malpractice do not rise to the level of a constitutional violation, and thus fail to state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
The court held that the third amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, dismissing the case without prejudice to state court.
-
The plaintiff lacks standing to bring claims on behalf of her deceased husband because she has not alleged she is the personal representative of his estate as required by Florida law.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for injunctive relief and ordered him to file an amended complaint because the original complaint was a "shotgun pleading" that failed to state claims with sufficient specificity.
-
The court accepted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting in part and denying in part the Defendants' Bill of Costs.
-
The court held that claims implying the invalidity of a conviction are barred by Heck v. Humphrey, and other claims fail to state a plausible claim for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Sheriff's Office or Detective Mazone, and that property damage claims are not cognizable under § 1983 when a post-deprivation remedy exists.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, rendering her motion to proceed in forma pauperis moot and her motion for referral to a volunteer attorney program denied without prejudice.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate's complaint failed to state a claim for relief under the Eighth Amendment and was properly dismissed.
-
The court dismissed the plaintiff's excessive force claim without prejudice, allowing him to file an amended complaint. Claims against defendants in their official capacities were dismissed, and claims against two defendants in their individual capacities were dismissed for insuf
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and that the court should abstain from interfering with pending state criminal proceedings.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted due to time-barred claims, improper defendants, and lack of factual allegations.
-
Expert testimony by Dr. Roy Bedard regarding police practices, the Sheriff's custom of condoning misconduct, and negligent hiring, supervision, and retention was excluded as unreliable and unhelpful under Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and Daubert. The court found that Bedard's op
-
N.D. Fla.·
2022-03-31
The court granted defendants' motions to exclude the expert opinions and testimony of Dr. Roy Bedard.
-
The court held that the defendants are not entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity for the unreasonable search claim because there was no genuine issue of material fact supporting the emergency aid exception to the warrant requirement.