Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersflmd

2,960 results

0.97s

  • United States v. Williams

    476 F. Supp. 2d 1368 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 6, 2007

    The evidence clearly establishes that Defendants Williams and Bridley caused the lien documents to be mailed. Furthermore, the documents evince a clear intent to defraud. … In order to qualify as irreparable, harm or injury must be “actual and imminent.” Id.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Filmore v. Officer Cooper

    District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 17, 2020

    Defendants argue Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and fails to state an Eighth Amendment violation entitling Defendants to qualified immunity. … As such, they are entitled to qualified immunity, and their motions will be granted.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • McCoy v. Department of Education

    District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 24, 2024

    The allegations in the complaint are insufficient to establish a monetary injury in fact. Mr. … While DOE does not contest causation and redressability, the factual assertions here are clearly inadequate to establish either. See generally Dkt. 24. DOE has not caused Mr.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Continental Casualty Co. v. City of Jacksonville

    654 F. Supp. 2d 1338 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 7, 2009

    Therefore, conclusory allegations, unsupported by specific evidence, will be insufficient to establish a genuine issue of material fact to defeat a motion for summary judgment. Lujan v. … DCSB claims the specific language of the pollution exclusion is ambiguous as it “does not clearly and unambiguously apply to a policyholder who did not cause the pollution” and therefore should be construed in favor of DCSB

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Lonnie Lee v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

    District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 2, 2026

    “The focus . . . is on whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law is objectively unreasonable, . . . an unreasonable application is different from an incorrect one.” Bell v. … The phrase “clearly established Federal law” encompasses only the holdings of the United States Supreme Court “as of the time of the relevant state-court decision.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Outrigger Beach Club Condo. Ass'n, Inc.

    304 F. Supp. 3d 1208 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 5, 2018

    As alleged, the newsletter qualified as a notice about services sent to the Association's members to garner support that disparaged Bluegreen's goods and services, causing injury. ( See Ex. B to Doc. 1 at 23, § V(14) ). … But, these estoppel theories were established in situations where the insurers failed to issue reservation of rights letters to the insured. Id.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Powell v. Schweiker

    514 F. Supp. 439 · District Court, M.D. Florida · May 14, 1981

    For the Court to substitute its own judgment about what constitutes “comparable severity” would be to overturn a policy which the Secretary’s expertise particularly qualifies him to develop. … Likewise, the Secretary’s interpretation of the statute is not clearly erroneous or unreasonable.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Bergquist v. Fidelity Information Services, Inc.

    399 F. Supp. 2d 1320 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 10, 2005

    Defendant argues because Plaintiffs duties and salary qualify under both regulations, summary judgment is appropriate. V. … Plaintiffs Form of Payment Defendant argues Plaintiff was paid on a salary basis and that he qualifies as an exempt computer employee. For the following reasons, the Court agrees with the Defendant.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Abbott v. City of Cape Canaveral

    840 F. Supp. 880 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 5, 1994

    Reasonable and Clearly Defined Health, Safety, or Aesthetic Objective. … Said measurement shall be calculated from the established grade to the dish center. H. The maximum outside diameter allowed for a dish receiver is ten (10) feet. I.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • PNC Bank, National Ass'n v. Orchid Group Investments, LLC

    36 F. Supp. 3d 1294 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 6, 2014

    him as a “custodian or other qualified witness.” 5 (Doc. # 102 at 7-8). … The *1304 Knaus Affidavit clearly establishes Knaus’ personal knowledge of how Plaintiffs Records are maintained on a regular basis and his review of Plaintiffs Records as they pertain to Defendant Orchid’s loan, all of which

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Voter Verified, Inc. v. Premier Election Solutions, Inc.

    739 F. Supp. 2d 1340 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 15, 2010

    See Lister, 583 F.3d at 1312 (holding that a reference archived in an on-line database searchable by keyword qualified as printed publication). … A structure is “corresponding only if the specification [] clearly associated] the structure with the performance of the function.” Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc. v. St.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Miller v. United States

    267 F. Supp. 326 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 10, 1967

    Miller, is the duly qualified and acting executrix of the Estate of George V. Miller. … The questions presented are, first, whether Trust A establishes a terminable interest, and secondly, if it is a terminable interest, whether it nevertheless qualifies for the marital deduction as an exception to the terminable-interest

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Van Scoyoc v. Belleair Beach, Fla.

    District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 30, 2024

    (Dkt. 165 at 59) In her motion, Plaintiff contends the Individual Defendants violated a clearly established right. (Id. … The Individual Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity for their decision to remove Plaintiff from the Park Board.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Harmon v. Lux

    District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 15, 2020

    A claim is frivolous where it is apparent from the face of the complaint the allegations are “clearly baseless” or the “legal theories are indisputable meritless.” Carroll v. … Alternatively, the Eight Amendment establishes that “prison officials may have a duty to porrect the health and safety of inmates in their custody, but that duty does not extend to prosecutors

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Nestor v. VPC3 II, LLP

    District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 16, 2021

    Plaintiff’s allegations in paragraph 182 of the Second Amended Complaint regarding the State’s behavioral health system and the failure to provide services in a more integrated system are nonsensical in this action and clearly … Additionally, to establish liability in an official- capacity suit, more is required than simply showing that the official, acting under color of state law, deprived a federal right, unlike a personal-capacity

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • George v. United States

    650 F. Supp. 2d 1196 · District Court, M.D. Florida · May 14, 2009

    minimum term of 180 months, or 15 years, of imprisonment, which it did, followed by 36 months, or 3 years, of supervised release. 4 Although at sentencing Plaintiff contended that his prior conviction for escape did not qualify … established his entitlement to relief under § 2255.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • United States v. Starcher

    883 F. Supp. 2d 1175 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 30, 2012

    Petitioners also do not qualify as bona fide purchasers “without knowledge of the forfeitability of’ the Airplane. … Any registration or lien on the Airplane that Petitioners would file at this juncture would clearly be after Petitioners learned of the forfeiture and negate an objectively reasonable belief they have in the property.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Boyd v. Decker

    District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 30, 2021

    Judges have immunity under federal law when they act in their judicial capacity, Sibley v. … Boyd fails to allege sufficient facts to establish these elements.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • McIntosh v. City of Live Oak, Fla.

    609 F. Supp. 590 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 2, 1985

    Turning to the case sub judice, some of the plaintiff’s allegations describe acts which clearly were random and unauthorized. … The Court finds that the alleged errors charged against these defendants sufficiently deviate from the Charter’s established procedure to qualify as random and unauthorized acts.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC

    District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 27, 2024

    Here, Relator has established each of these elements, as (1) Relator and Dr. … “[O]pinion work product enjoys a nearly absolute immunity and can be discovered only in very rare and extraordinary circumstances.” Cox v. Admin. U.S.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.