Case law

Lange

District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 3, 2025

Eleventh Amendment Immunity Defendants argue that “Eleventh Amendment Immunity applies to § 1983 claims” and that Lange “appears to bring claims against Defendants … App'x 1002, 1007 n.7 (11th Cir. 2020).3 The Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice to 2 In any future motion to dismiss, the Defendants should clearly delineate which of their arguments

Sievers

District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 27, 2026

Section 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) dismissals should only be ordered when the legal theories are “indisputably meritless,” id. at 327, or when the claims rely on factual allegations which are “clearly baseless.” Denton v. … Id. at *5, 7 (holding that prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity because, even though some were aware of a “risk in the abstract,” the plaintiffs’ arguments “invoke[d] a negligence standard, premised on

Franklin v. DeSantis

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 19, 2022

Examples of “clearly baseless” contentions are those that can be described as “fantastic or delusional.” Id. … as when the supervisor knows a subordinate will act unlawfully or adopts a policy that results in deliberate indifference to an inmate’s constitutional rights—the requisite causal connection “can be established

Kirk

District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 17, 2026

Plaintiff must also clearly identify in his demand the relief sought in his amended complaint.” (footnote omitted)). The Amended Complaint does not comply with these instructions. Doc. 4. … As the Prior Order explained, “it is well established that a state is not a citizen of a state for the purpose of diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.” Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am.

Omnipol, a.S. v. Multinational Defense Services, LCC

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 17, 2019

United States, 260 F.3d 1316, 1318 (11th Cir. 2001) (“It is well established that the FTCA is a specific waiver of the sovereign immunity of the United States and must be strictly … However, “[t]he FTCA qualifies its waiver of sovereign immunity for certain categories of claims (13 in all).

Rodriguez v. Bac Home Loans Servicing LP

853 F. Supp. 2d 1203 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 6, 2012

On March 1, 2011, Plaintiffs sent correspondence to Defendant BAC, identifying the correspondence as a Qualified Written Request (“QWR”) with respect to Plaintiff Rodriguez’s mortgage. (Doc. No. 4 at ¶22). … The party “invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing” standing. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 561 , 112 S.Ct. 2130 , 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992).

Shadmani v. Barnes

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 28, 2023

Although the State of Florida and its subsidiaries such as municipalities are generally immune from tort liability, Florida has waived its immunity “under circumstances in which the state agency or subdivision, if a private … In Lewis, the Eleventh Circuit explained that “[a] city’s decision regarding how to train its officers and what subject matter to include in the training is clearly an exercise of governmental discretion regarding

Dall v. United States

42 F. Supp. 2d 1275 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 24, 1998

Navy, and that provision of such is clearly preferable to the vagaries and delay of a tort lawsuit. … Although there exist statutory exceptions to the waiver of the United States’ sovereign immunity effected by the FTCA, see 28 U.S.C. § 2680 , the Feres doctrine is judicially-created. 2 .

Volp v. Sasser

District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 30, 2020

In August 2013, although not required, Deputy Sasser entered a 520- hour crossover program to become dually qualified as a correctional officer and a law enforcement officer. (Docs. 57-3 at 8–9, 13; 57-6). … Dep’t of Highway Patrol, 882 So. 2d 928, 933 (Fla. 2004)) (“[B]asic judgmental or discretionary governmental functions are immune from legal action, whereas operational acts are not protected by sovereign immunity

Joseph v. Inspector General

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 27, 2023

“A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy not to be granted unless the movant clearly establishes the burden of persuasion as to [all] four requisites.” … To the extent the motions can be interpreted as a request that prison officials be ordered not to retaliate against him for filing his lawsuits, it is clearly established that retaliating

Bayside Enterprises, Inc. v. Carson

450 F. Supp. 696 · District Court, M.D. Florida · May 18, 1978

Under the criteria established in United States v. … First, the authenticity of the máp is not subject to serious challenge; in fact, the map probably qualifies as a self-authenticating publication under Fed.R.Ev. 902.

Nealy v. Vilches

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

No. 2), it appears that Plaintiff qualifies as a pauper pursuant to § 1915(a)(1). However, on review of the complaint (Doc. … Therefore, in an amended complaint, Plaintiff must clearly allege the legal basis of the cause of action, whether a constitutional provision, treaty, statute, or common law.

Guzman

District Court, M.D. Florida · May 26, 2026

To the extent the state court proceedings remain pending, the abstention doctrine established in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971) may also require dismissing Plaintiff’s claims. … The amended complaint must clearly state the legal theory or theories upon which Plaintiff seeks relief and explain with factual allegations how defendant(s) are responsible.

Hoover

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 25, 2026

To qualify for “next friend” standing, the would-be next friend must “provide an adequate explanation—such as inaccessibility, mental incompetence, or other disability—why the real party in interest cannot appear … “The burden is on the ‘next friend’ clearly to establish the propriety of his status.” Id. at 164. Bilal fails to show that he has standing to litigate on behalf of Plaintiff.

Mutchler v. United States

District Court, M.D. Florida · May 19, 2021

FAA policy has always required [air safety inspectors] to see evidence of the applicant’s employment, which should clearly show that applicants are in a position involving … See (Doc. # 52-5 at 11 (“FAA [air safety inspectors] should review evidence of the applicant’s employment, which should clearly show that the applicant is in a position involving the regular

Moore

District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 18, 2025

The Eleventh Circuit ruled that this Court “did not clearly err in finding Moore did not meet his burden of showing he clearly accepted responsibility for his offense” and “understood its discretion in granting or denying … A petitioner establishes prejudice only when he establishes “a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”

Farwell v. City of Jacksonville

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 11, 2021

In addition, Defendants argue that Jones and Groff are entitled to qualified immunity as well as state sovereign immunity. See id. … Last, with regards to his federal claims, Farwell argues that Defendants Jones and Groff are not entitled to sovereign immunity or qualified immunity because they were acting “outside their lawful authority.”

Smith v. Centurion Healthcare HM LLC

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 3, 2020

immunity. … immunity.

McCune v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 12, 2024

A decision involves an “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law “if the state court identifies the correct governing legal principle from [the Supreme] Court’s decisions but unreasonably applies that … Accordingly, “[t]he focus . . . is on whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law is objectively unreasonable, and . . . an unreasonable application is different from an incorrect one

Wilson v. Walgreen Income Protection Plan for Pharmacists & Registered Nurses

942 F. Supp. 2d 1213 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 29, 2013

Lewis gave conclusory, qualified, single-sentence responses to the first four questions. … McGrory clearly testified that the SPD did not “establish” the plan at issue in this litigation, and a review of the SPD reveals that it does not conform to all the requirements of section 1102(b).