-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-01-22
The court held that the plaintiff plausibly stated claims for substantive and procedural due process violations, and First Amendment retaliation, but dismissed the claim that the trespass policy was void for vagueness.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-01-14
The court held that claims for inmate account withdrawals between 2015-2018 are dismissed with prejudice as time-barred, and a claim for a 2024 withdrawal fails to state a procedural due process violation and is dismissed without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-12-04
The court held that the plaintiffs' claims for due process violations and tortious interference were barred by qualified and sovereign immunity, respectively, and thus failed to state a plausible claim.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-11-25
The court held that MedEnvios's due process rights were not violated by the exclusion of zero-paid claims, interest accumulation, or recoupment, but MedEnvios is entitled to an accounting.
-
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.·
2024-07-12
The court held that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently plead a 'class of one' equal protection claim because it did not identify a similarly situated comparator with adequate specificity, and dismissed the procedural due process claim for failure to plead the unavailability of
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-03-25
The court held that the Department of Health and Human Services violated MedEnvios's due process rights by failing to timely provide documentation supporting recalculated overpayment amounts, but did not violate due process by excluding zero-paid claims from sampling.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-03-15
The Court granted the Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, finding the Amended Complaint to be a shotgun pleading and dismissing it without prejudice, while also expressing doubts about the viability of the Section 1983 claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-01-12
The court held that the petitioner's claims for procedural due process violations, equal protection violations, and compassionate release were without merit and denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-09-19
Police Captain Sergio Perez sued the City of Opa-Locka under the First Amendment and Florida's Whistleblower Act, claiming retaliation for raising concerns about financial mismanagement and for filing the lawsuit itself. The court granted the city's motion for summary judgment on
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-06-09
The court held that the plaintiff's civil rights complaint was premature because success on his claim would necessarily imply the invalidity of the disciplinary punishment, and alternatively, that he failed to state a claim because he was not deprived of a protected liberty inter
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-05-12
The court recommended granting in part the motion to declare plaintiffs vexatious litigants, restricting their ability to file new cases in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-06-17
The court held that claims based on fabricated disciplinary reports are premature if not invalidated, and sanctions imposed (administrative confinement and CARE level reduction) do not implicate constitutional due process concerns.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-03-16
The court held that the plaintiff may proceed on claims for procedural due process and unconstitutional conditions of confinement, but his Equal Protection claim is dismissed without prejudice, with leave to amend.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-03-14
The court granted the defendants' motions to dismiss the amended complaint because it was a shotgun pleading.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-03-07
The court held that the amended complaint sufficiently alleged a procedural due process claim against the County, but failed to state a claim for a categorical taking and that Officer Pisano was entitled to qualified immunity.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-08-13
The court held that Plaintiff failed to state a claim against Poppell and Sawyer regarding the disciplinary policy, but may proceed with procedural due process claims against Porfert, McCawley, and Carner.
-
11th Cir.·
2021-08-03
A federal appeals court held that a district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to review a Veterans Affairs physician's employment discharge under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Mandamus Act because the Veterans Benefits Act establishes a comprehensive statutory
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-08-14
The court held that the United States' sovereign immunity bars the plaintiff's claims, and the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies and state a claim against the United States.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-07-20
The court held that the plaintiff's claims against federal officers for property damage do not fall within the limited contexts recognized for Bivens actions, and alternative remedies exist, thus the complaint is dismissed. The court also affirmed the magistrate judge's denial of
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-05-07
The court held that the state court's adjudication of the petitioner's claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, and therefore, the petition for writ of habeas corpus should be denied.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2019-08-22
Summary judgment is granted for the hospital on all claims because plaintiffs received procedural due process and the hospital is immune from liability for breach of bylaws due to lack of intentional fraud.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2014-09-24
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and that the defendants were entitled to absolute immunity for their quasi-judicial actions in investigating the plaintiff's discrimination claim.
-
1990 WL 132554·
S.D. Fla.·
2013-03-27
An assignee of a mortgage cannot be held liable under TILA for violations that were not apparent on the face of the disclosure documents at the time of the assignment.
-
1989 WL 158497·
N.D. Fla.·
2013-02-06
The court denied the defendant's motion for partial summary judgment, finding that res judicata and collateral estoppel did not bar the plaintiff's claims.
-
747 F. Supp. 2d 1362·
S.D. Fla.·
2010-10-06
A federal employee hired under a temporary appointment (38 U.S.C. § 7405(a)(1)(A)) is not entitled to constitutional due process protections prior to the revocation of medical staff privileges or termination, as neither federal statutes nor relevant VA regulations create a proper
-
720 F. Supp. 2d 1351·
M.D. Fla.·
2010-06-28
The court held that the plaintiff's waiver of his right to access peer review materials was valid, dismissing claims based on the nondisclosure of those materials. However, claims challenging the vagueness and overbreadth of the peer review criterion itself were not dismissed bas
-
768 F. Supp. 2d 1180·
M.D. Fla.·
2010-06-11
The seller of a pre-construction condominium unit appeals a trial court's summary judgment for the buyer, arguing the sales contract was authorized under the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (ILSFDA) and not subject to revocation.
-
703 F. Supp. 2d 1279·
S.D. Fla.·
2010-03-18
The court held that the plaintiff's speech as a citizen on a matter of public concern is constitutionally protected, and therefore the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the First Amendment retaliation claim should be denied. However, the court granted summary judgment fo
-
Del. Ch.·
2008-02-06
The Delaware Court of Chancery held that plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the designation of their properties as Natural Areas (NAs) because such designations have no independent legal significance and impose no restrictions on landowners. The court further held that the S
-
528 F. Supp. 2d 1271·
N.D. Fla.·
2007-12-14
A national political party has a First Amendment right to set its own delegate selection rules and schedule, and a state cannot compel the party to seat delegates chosen in violation of those rules.
-
492 F. Supp. 2d 1343·
S.D. Fla.·
2007-01-12
The court held that a pre-deprivation hearing for towed vehicles is not constitutionally required or feasible, and the available post-deprivation remedies under Florida law were adequate.
-
447 F. Supp. 2d 1292·
M.D. Fla.·
2006-08-15
The court modified the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation to include abstention analysis, denied the motion for preliminary injunction, and granted the motion to dismiss certain claims, abstaining from others.
-
180 F. Supp. 2d 1321·
S.D. Fla.·
2001-12-04
The court held that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar claims under the Medicaid Act but does bar claims under the Adoption and Safe Families Act due to its detailed remedial scheme. The court also found that Younger abstention did not apply.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2001-06-11
The Court granted summary judgment for the defendants on all claims. The court found no material issues of fact regarding the plaintiff's claims of fraud, breach of contract, constitutional violations, and tort claims barred by governmental immunity.
-
78 F. Supp. 2d 1298·
M.D. Fla.·
1999-03-17
Summary judgment is granted for the County because the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies for her age discrimination claim, did not establish pretext for her termination, and her due process claims fail as a matter of law.
-
999 F.2d 802·
5th Cir.·
1993-08-18
The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment based on res judicata, as the prior administrative hearing did not address the propriety of the initial business closing or resulting damages.
-
995 F.2d 861·
8th Cir.·
1993-06-15
The court held that under Missouri law, an employee handbook does not create a protected property interest in continued employment for an at-will employee, and therefore, the employee had no right to procedural due process upon termination.
-
994 F.2d 676·
9th Cir.·
1993-05-28
The court held that the city ordinance regulating itinerant vending did not violate the Commerce Clause, Equal Protection Clause, or Due Process Clause, as it was rationally related to legitimate governmental interests and lacked discriminatory intent.
-
990 F.2d 842·
5th Cir.·
1993-05-17
The court held that even if the employee had a property interest in his job, the city provided sufficient pretermination due process safeguards, thus affirming the grant of summary judgment.
-
980 F.2d 37·
1st Cir.·
1992-11-24
The court held that plaintiffs were prevailing parties entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 because their lawsuit had a catalytic effect in bringing about significant improvements in the defendants' isolation policies, even though they did not achieve complete succe
-
976 F.2d 966·
5th Cir.·
1992-11-10
The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the claims against the state agencies due to Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity and dismissed the claim against the employer because the federal claims against the agencies were dismissed.
-
979 F.2d 1004·
5th Cir.·
1992-11-09
The court held that a school district and its employees are immune from liability for intentional torts and discretionary acts within the scope of employment, and a plaintiff waives claims by signing a release.
-
970 F.2d 252·
7th Cir.·
1992-07-16
A university professor's unprofessional conduct towards a student, including demeaning correspondence and arbitrary grading, is not protected by academic freedom or the First Amendment, and the university followed proper procedures in sanctioning him.
-
946 F.2d 1233·
6th Cir.·
1991-10-18
The court held that the plaintiff arguably alleged sufficient facts to create an implied contract or mutually explicit understanding for promotion based on test scores, and alleged a lack of adequate state remedy, thus surviving the motion to dismiss.
-
937 F.2d 144·
5th Cir.·
1991-07-22
The University is an arm of the state immune under the Eleventh Amendment, and the City's removal of the plaintiff from a re-employment list was rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose, thus not violating due process or equal protection.
-
903 F.2d 212·
3d Cir.·
1990-05-15
The court held that the plaintiff lacked standing to challenge the Pennsylvania Adoption Act's procedures in federal court because the state court's final order terminating her parental rights was res judicata and could not be collaterally attacked. The court also found the claim
-
869 F.2d 1322·
9th Cir.·
1989-03-13
An "approval in principle" for a development project does not constitute a constitutionally protected property interest, and conspiracy claims based on alleged contractual duties are tort claims subject to a statute of limitations.
-
865 F.2d 1084·
9th Cir.·
1989-01-13
The court held that the Secretary of Labor was not required to publish changes in the Bureau of Labor Statistics' statistical methodology under the Job Training Partnership Act or the Administrative Procedure Act, and that the change did not violate due process.
-
860 F.2d 306·
8th Cir.·
1988-10-27
A student does not possess a liberty or property interest in promotion to the next grade, and an equal protection claim requires a showing of irrational classification or disparate treatment.