Denmark v. Florida Department of Revenue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TAMPA DIVISION

ARIK J. DENMARK,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 8:24-cv-02019-KKM-NHA

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF

REVENUE,

Defendant.

___________________________________

ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Arik J. Denmark sues the Florida Department of Revenue under the Due

Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution and state

constitution, alleging that “[a]ny taxation on [Denmark’s] property” is

unconstitutional. Am. Compl. (Doc. 4) at 3 . Denmark requests relief in the form of

an injunction against the Department of Revenue from imposing future property

taxes on him, a refund of all taxes collected on his property, and an award of

compensatory damages in the amount of $178,000. Id. at 5. Because the Eleventh

Amendment bars this suit, the action must be dismissed due to lack of subject

matter jurisdiction.

“Longstanding principles of federal law oblige us to inquire sua sponte

whenever a doubt arises as to the existence of federal jurisdiction.” Green v.

Graham, 906 F.3d 955, 961 (11th Cir. 2018) (citing Vermeulen v. Renault, U.S.A., Inc.,

985 F.2d 1534, 1542 (11th Cir. 1993)). Because the Eleventh Amendment is an

“explicit limitation on federal jurisdiction,” it “should be decided at an early stage

[of litigation].” Bouchard Transp. Co. v. Fla. Dep't of Envtl. Prot., 91 F.3d 1445, 1448

(11th Cir. 1996). Therefore, it is appropriate to address at this early stage, before

the defendant has even answered.

The Eleventh Amendment bars suits against state defendants in federal

court by its own citizens or citizens from other states. Raygor v. Regents of the Univ.

of Minn., 534 U.S. 533, 541 (2002). Immunity can be overcome if Congress

abrogated the state’s immunity, the state consents to suit, or the state waives its

immunity. Cross v. Alabama, 49 F.3d 1490, 1502 (11th Cir. 1995). The Eleventh

Amendment’s bar against suits extends to state agencies and even entities that

“function as an ‘arm of the state.’ ” Ross v. Jefferson Cnty. Dep't of Health, 701 F.3d

655, 659 (11th Cir. 2012) (quoting Manders v. Lee, 338 F.3d 1304, 1308 (11th Cir.2003)

(en banc)).

Because the Department is a state agency, it is entitled to immunity in

federal court under the Eleventh Amendment. See Brown v. Fla. Dep't of Revenue

Off. of Child Support Enf't, 697 F. App'x 692 (11th Cir. 2017) (affirming dismissal of

suit against Florida Department of Revenue on grounds of Eleventh Amendment

immunity). The exceptions to immunity do not apply because Florida has neither

consented to suit nor waived its immunity, nor has Congress abrogated Florida’s

immunity.1 See id. at 693. The remedy for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is

“dismiss[al] without prejudice[.]” Stalley ex rel. United States v. Orlando Reg'l

Healthcare Sys., Inc., 524 F.3d 1229, 1235 (11th Cir. 2008).

1 To the extent that Denmark’s claims arise under § 1983, Eleventh Amendment immunity bars those

claims as well. See Am. Compl. at 5; Cross, 49 F.3d at 1502-03.

Accordingly, the following is ORDERED:

1. The Amended Complaint, (Doc. 4), is DISMISSED without

prejudice and without leave to amend for lack of jurisdiction on

the basis of Eleventh Amendment immunity. If Denmark wishes

to pursue these claims, he may choose to do so in state court to

the extent possible, but they may not be re-filed in this Court.

2. The Clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions and

deadlines, and CLOSE this case.

ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on September 30, 2024.

Tn? ed...

TOMBARBER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE*

* Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber to expedite the resolution of this motion. This case remains assigned

to Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle.