649 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 218 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-07-11
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim against any defendant and must be dismissed.
-
A federal court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over a removed state-court eviction case where the removal is based on the plaintiff's counterclaims or defenses, and abstention is appropriate if the case were treated as originally filed in federal court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-07-06
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting motions to dismiss and dismissing the plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint without leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-06-08
The federal court must abstain from interfering with the pending state civil commitment proceedings under the Younger doctrine.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-06-06
The court held that a pro se habeas petition must be dismissed without prejudice because it contains unexhausted claims and the petitioner failed to pay the filing fee or submit a sufficient motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-05-26
The court held that Younger abstention doctrine compelled dismissal of the federal habeas petition due to an ongoing state civil commitment proceeding that is akin to a criminal prosecution.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-05-20
The federal court must abstain from hearing a pretrial detainee's habeas corpus petition challenging his state prosecution due to the Younger abstention doctrine.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-16
The court held that a federal prisoner cannot use a § 1983 action to challenge the fact or duration of his confinement, and such claims are barred by abstention doctrines.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's withdrawal of his bar application did not moot the Younger abstention doctrine and that defendants were entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for damages claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-05-06
The court held that a pro se plaintiff's amended complaint must be dismissed because the action is barred by Younger abstention, Heck v. Humphrey, and prosecutorial immunity.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2022-05-04
The court held that the Florida E-Filing Authority is an arm of the state and thus immune from suit, but its chair, Rushing, is a proper defendant for injunctive relief. The court also held that Clerk Forman is not a judicial officer for purposes of the FCIA and that docketing co
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-27
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.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-04-26
Peter Davis, a Bahamas national, sued the Broward County Sheriff and Department of Homeland Security alleging that an immigration hold placed on his jail roster violated his Fourth Amendment rights, caused false imprisonment, and denied him access to courts while he was detained
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-21
The court held that the Younger abstention doctrine requires dismissal of a federal habeas corpus petition filed by a state pretrial detainee challenging ongoing state criminal proceedings.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-05
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.
-
The court held that a federal habeas petitioner challenging unaffordable bail must demonstrate the trial court's ruling was not rationally related to a legitimate government interest, and that the state court complied with procedural due process by considering less restrictive al
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-01-07
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice, granting the plaintiff an opportunity to amend due to failure to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-12-22
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-10-28
The court held that federal courts must abstain from interfering with ongoing state criminal proceedings when adequate state remedies exist.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-10-15
The court held that a federal habeas petition challenging ongoing state criminal proceedings must be dismissed under the Younger abstention doctrine and for failure to state a claim.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2021-10-14
The court held that Plaintiff's claims for injunctive and declaratory relief are barred by the Younger abstention doctrine, and Defendants are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for damages claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-10-13
The court granted the plaintiff's motion to continue the stay of the case.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-10-01
The court held that the plaintiff's proposed amended complaint failed to state a plausible claim for excessive force or to challenge pending criminal proceedings. The court granted a final opportunity to amend the excessive force claim.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-09-20
The court held that the plaintiff's claims regarding the legality of an immigration detainer and continued detention do not constitute undue interference with pending state criminal proceedings, thus Younger abstention is not warranted.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-08-30
The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted due to vague and conclusory allegations, and dismissed it without prejudice, granting leave to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-08-27
The court granted the City's motion to dismiss, finding Plaintiff failed to state a claim for municipal liability and due process violations, and dismissed claims against individual officers for failure to serve process.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-08-12
The federal court dismissed the habeas petition because Younger abstention doctrine applied, requiring deference to ongoing state criminal proceedings.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 due to insufficient factual allegations and naming improper defendants.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed because it fails to state a claim, is an impermissible shotgun pleading, and certain claims are barred by Rooker-Feldman and Younger abstention doctrines.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's pro se complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and was subject to dismissal.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-06-28
The court held that the petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed as premature and under the doctrine of Younger abstention, as state civil commitment proceedings are ongoing and implicate important state interests.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-06-11
The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to dismiss the complaint without prejudice, finding that Younger abstention applies.
-
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review state court decisions and could not enjoin pending state criminal proceedings.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-05-26
The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately state claims for false arrest, imprisonment, and violation of a Florida statute, and that the Sheriff's Office is not a suable entity.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-02-18
The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition filed by a pre-trial detainee challenging ongoing state criminal proceedings must be dismissed under the Younger abstention doctrine.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-01-29
The court held that the plaintiff's claims against the judge were barred by judicial immunity and the Younger abstention doctrine, requiring dismissal.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-01-06
The Court held that abstention under the Younger doctrine is warranted, requiring a stay of the federal proceedings.
-
The court held that the complaint must be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and because abstention principles apply.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-16
The court held that the case must be dismissed due to abstention principles, immunity of state actors, and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
-
The court held that federal intervention in pending state criminal proceedings is barred by the abstention doctrine and principles of exhaustion and comity, and confinement claims must be brought via habeas corpus.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-12-01
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments and that abstention was appropriate due to an ongoing state criminal proceeding.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-10-30
The court held that abstention under Younger is appropriate, dismissing claims for declaratory or injunctive relief and staying claims for monetary damages pending resolution of state proceedings.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-10-19
The court held that the petition for writ of habeas corpus must be dismissed because the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies and the Younger abstention doctrine applies.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-10-14
The court held that it must abstain from exercising jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claims under the Younger abstention doctrine due to ongoing state court proceedings involving important state interests.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-08-12
The court held that a pretrial detainee cannot seek relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and that the petition, construed under § 2241, was not cognizable due to failure to exhaust state remedies and principles of abstention.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-07-30
The court granted Plaintiff's motion to appeal in forma pauperis, finding his appeal was taken in good faith and not frivolous, but denied his motion for appointment of counsel.
-
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.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-07-09
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to alter or amend the judgment, finding that reconsideration was not warranted and the Younger abstention doctrine applied to the claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-05-18
The court held that it must abstain from hearing the case under the Younger doctrine due to ongoing state criminal proceedings, and therefore denied the motion to amend as futile and dismissed the case.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-05-05
The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus petition should be denied because he failed to exhaust his state court remedies and, alternatively, his claims were insufficient on the merits.