Case law

Granite State Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. City of St. Pete Beach, FL

322 F. Supp. 2d 1335 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 13, 2004

The term “Billboard,” which was not previously defined, is defined as “a sign structure and/or sign utilized for advertising an establishment, an activity, a product, service or entertainment, which is sold, produced, available … Granite State concedes that the individual defendants (Friszolowski and Bonfield) are entitled to qualified immunity based on this Court’s prior conclusion in Granite State Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v.

Hoover v. Bank of American Corp.

286 F. Supp. 2d 1326 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 24, 2003

Whether such departures were voluntary or forced is not clearly established, although Plaintiff makes a vague claim that he was terminated. … Secondly, Plaintiff has never satisfactorily demonstrated that he was vested at the time in question, although clearly he is now vested.

Stone v. United States

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

Stone also cannot establish actual prejudice, which is more than a possibility of prejudice. … Stone also urges that Hobbs Act robbery is an indivisible offense and cannot categorically qualify as a crime of violence because 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) “clearly subsumes the offenses of substantive Hobbs Act robbery, attempted

Norman v. Duval County School Board

361 F. Supp. 1167 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 9, 1973

In mandating abstention, the Court clearly disregarded the importance of the constitutional question raised therein: The complaint of the Pullman porters undoubtedly tendered a substantial constitutional issue. … regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Stuckey v. Lemma

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 5, 2019

“To establish a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must prove (1) a violation of a constitutional right, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.” Holmes v. … Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the Magistrate Judge’s Orders were clearly erroneous or contrary to the law. 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

Malave v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 21, 2021

establishes a two-step analysis for determining the appropriate hourly rate to be applied in calculating attorney’s fees under the Act.” Meyer v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 1029, 1033 (11th Cir. 1992). … To do otherwise amounts to awarding interest for which the United States has not waived sovereign immunity. Id.; accord United States v.

Rebman v. Follett Higher Education Group, Inc.

248 F.R.D. 624 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 21, 2008

“The contracting parties’ intent to benefit the third party must be specific and must be clearly expressed in the contract in order to endow the third party beneficiary with a legally enforceable right.” … After reviewing the statutory scheme, the court concluded that plaintiffs were intended third-party beneficiaries because, among other things, the statutory scheme was expressly designed to benefit the poor who qualified

Olsen v. Astrue

858 F. Supp. 2d 1306 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 7, 2012

Thus, clearly the ALJ found Plaintiff had a severe mental impairment that affected his ability to work. … Astrue, 2009 WL 763740 at *2, "There is clearly a disconnect ...” in the ALJ’s findings.

National Business Aviation Ass'n v. City of Naples Airport Authority

162 F. Supp. 2d 1343 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 8, 2001

circumstances: Where the statute regulates even-hand-edly to effectuate a legitimate local public interest, and its effects on interstate commerce are only incidental, it will be upheld unless the burden imposed on such commerce is clearly … This express pre-emption is qualified by 49 U.S.C. § 41713 (b)(3), which provides that subsection (b) does not limit a State or political subdivision of a state that operates an airport from carrying out its proprietary powers

Atheists of Florida, Inc. v. City of Lakeland

838 F. Supp. 2d 1293 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 22, 2012

That is not to say, however, that any and all legislative prayer is immune from Establishment Clause challenges under Marsh : when legislative prayer is “exploited to proselytize or advance any one, or to disparage any other … That said, and despite the fact that Plaintiffs here allege a violation of clearly established federal law, they have adduced nothing whatsoever (other than conclusory allegations) to demonstrate that the City pursued an

Isaly Co. v. Kraft, Inc.

619 F. Supp. 983 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 15, 1985

Functional features cannot be protected, and merely descriptive features must have acquired secondary meaning before qualifying for protection. Id at 425 (citations omitted). … Weighing these factors together, the Court concludes that they establish a likelihood of confusion. The Plaintiff has therefore established the requisite elements to support its claim of trade dress infringement.

Nova Casualty Company v. Yutzy Tree Service, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 28, 2020

Broad’s complaint, the injury was neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the insured, and this exclusion is clearly inapt. … This means that at this juncture Nova has not established as an uncontested issue of fact that Yutzy is not an insured.

Saunders v. Nardella

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 6, 2025

Thus, she must establish a viable claim under federal law. … Here, Plaintiff cites actions taken by the judges that clearly fell within their judicial capacity.3 See Compl. (Doc. 1).

Gleason v. ROCHE LABORATORIES, INC.

745 F. Supp. 2d 1262 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 29, 2010

That is, Plaintiff first must establish a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge, then the burden shifts to Defendant to establish a legitimate business reason for her discharge, and if it does so, Plaintiff then bears … the burden of establishing that the proffered reason was pretextual.

Bemesderfer v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 31, 2023

Thus, to establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, a plaintiff must show that he: (1) is disabled; (2) is a qualified individual; and (3) was subjected to unlawful discrimination because of his disability … That said, expert testimony is unnecessary to explain the existence of the forced whispered voice test which is clearly stated in 49 C.F.R. § 391.41(b)(11). And, important here, Mr.

Bianco v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 28, 2020

“The EAJA ... establishes a two-step analysis for determining the appropriate hourly rate to be applied in calculating attorney’s fees under the Act.” Meyer v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 1029, 1033 (11th Cir. 1992). … To do otherwise amounts to awarding interest for which the United States has not waived sovereign immunity. Id.; accord United States v.

Groce v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 14, 2020

“The 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.” Id. at 694. … A federal court may not grant habeas relief “simply because that court concludes in its independent judgment that the relevant state- court decision applied clearly established federal law erroneously or incorrectly.”

New York Life Insurance v. G. H. C. Properties, Ltd.

361 F. Supp. 311 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 11, 1972

“A review of the affidavits and exhibits attached to such affidavits clearly establishes the fact that according to Plaintiff’s own representatives, the lease contracts furnished to Plaintiff by G.H.C. … When examined under the rules established in the Florida decisions, this claim is seen to be patently without merit.

Poole v. Tucker

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 21, 2022

Section 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) dismissals should be ordered only when the legal theories are “indisputably meritless,” id. at 327, or when the claims rely on factual allegations which are “clearly baseless.” … Here, Plaintiff has not alleged sufficient facts to establish his entitlement to relief.

Edwards

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

the Court to dismiss this case at any time if the Court determines that the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Notably, he does not clearly or overtly allege he submitted a proper request to participate in Passover, but the request was denied because he is not approved for RDP or CFO. See Complaint at 4.