Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,960 results
1.65s
District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 12, 2026
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 … 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.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownLavandeira v. Thirteenth Judicial Circuit
District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 28, 2024
(Docs. 183, 184, 198, 199, 200, 3 The State Attorney was, however, awarded summary judgment on Lavandeira’s RA claim on the basis of sovereign immunity. … Lavandeira and the City stipulated that Lavandeira was a qualified person with a disability under both the ADA and the RA. (Doc. 190 at 7).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 24, 2025
Delaware law establishes that contracting parties are bound by their contractual choices. See Nemec v. … Oct. 8, 2024) (finding disputes ancillary to the calculation of an earnout payment including (1) qualifying sales, (2) qualifying customers, and (3) qualifying revenue within the purview of the
Cited 0 timesUnknownWatson III v. State of Florida
District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 15, 2023
Kyle Dudek granted Watson leave to proceed in forma pauperis, so the Court must review the complaint to determine whether it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks monetary damages from anyone immune … But two of the claims are clearly meritless. The false imprisonment claim is frivolous. Watson complains that the FCCC continues to detain him after the completion of his criminal sentence.
Cited 0 timesUnknownMartinez v. Hutton (In Re Harwell)
414 B.R. 770 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 31, 2009
Addressing this defense, the Eleventh Circuit explained its use of the “mere conduit test,” acknowledged that the prior transferees in the overall scheme did not appear to qualify as “mere conduits,” but held that it did … But, since this Court has ruled that Hutton is not a transferee, this argument fails. 13 Since Hutton is not a transferee, Freeman is clearly on point and dispositive of this issue. B.
Cited 2 timesPublishedCitizens Mortgage Corp. v. Investors Mortgage Insurance
706 F. Supp. 819 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 10, 1989
Mere negotiations as to terms of an agreement to be entered into is not a meeting of minds and does not establish the existence of an enforceable contract. Goff v. … Only if Plaintiffs’ choice is clearly outweighed by considerations of convenience, cost, judicial economy, and expeditious discovery and trial process should this Court disregard the choice and transfer the action.
Cited 0 timesPublished118 F. Supp. 2d 1223 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 20, 2000
Sculptchair, Inc., 94 F.3d at 627-28 (11th Cir.1996) (relatively insignificant and sporadic sales efforts of three to five transactions grossing only $3,000 nevertheless qualified as a general course of business activity … One influential lower court decision has described the minimum contacts issue in the Internet context in terms of a spectrum: At one end of the spectrum are situations where a defendant clearly does business over the Internet
Cited 25 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 1, 2023
A claim is frivolous as a matter of law where, among other things, the defendants are immune from suit or the claim seeks to enforce a right that clearly does not exist. Id. at 327. … “[A]n inmate cannot establish relevant actual injury simply by establishing that his prison’s law library or legal assistance program is subpar in some theoretical sense.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownHill v. Secretary Department Of Corrections (Citrus County)
District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 19, 2024
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.” Williams v. … established federal law.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 8, 2025
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 … 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.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 29, 2021
He argues that he fulfilled his duties to conduct a 4 Emanoilidis also argues he is entitled to qualified immunity; 42 U.S.C. … “[T]he mere opportunity for suicide, without more, is clearly insufficient to impose liability on those charged with 12
Cited 0 timesUnknownLewis v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Glades County)
District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 1, 2021
“Clearly established federal law” consists of the governing legal principles set forth in the decisions of the United States Supreme Court when the state court issued its decision. … A decision is “contrary to” clearly established federal law if the state court either: (1) applied a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth by Supreme Court case law; or (2) reached
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 3, 2024
immunity and the Eleventh Amendment. … Making matters worse, Hill cites a bewildering variety of federal and state laws—including the First through Fourteenth Amendments—but fails to explain how his factual allegations establish violations of those laws.
Cited 0 timesUnknownAllen v. Jacksonville University
District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 14, 2022
substantive right to statutory immunity, the Court finds that it is a substantive statute. … Fla. 2020) (denying motion to dismiss because the college’s publications—which touted the college’s on-campus resources and facilities— clearly implied that courses would be in person); Rosado v. Barry Univ.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 14, 2019
qualifying felonies that met the criteria to classify Petitioner as a HFO. … of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts based on the evidence presented in the state court proceedings.
Cited 0 timesUnknownClare Land, LLC v. US Army Corps of Engineers
District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 8, 2022
“[A]s a matter of federal law, . . . a party ‘should have known’ of a claim of the United States at the time [it] was clearly and properly imputed with constructive notice of that claim under local recording statutes.” … But, given that Clare Land’s pleading establishes jurisdiction on its face, the United States’ motion to dismiss (Doc. 28) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to the United States’ ability to renew its jurisdictional argument,
Cited 0 timesUnknownKirk v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
331 F. Supp. 2d 1361 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 22, 2003
Summary judgment is mandated “against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case and on which that party will bear the burden of proof.” … Wu, a psychologist, in order to discern if she would qualify for Social Security Disability benefits. Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRoyal Potcake Rescue v. Centers For Disease Control & Prevention
District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 30, 2025
Thus, in terms of rabies immunity, the record shows that a dog is susceptible to inspection for rabies or rabies immunity at five months old. … The country of origin clearly matters (and has mattered since 1956).
Cited 0 timesUnknownAllstate Insurance v. Clohessy
32 F. Supp. 2d 1328 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 23, 1998
The statute authorizing the right to bring a bad faith action clearly and expressly states that the asserting party must have filed a Notice of Insurer Violation with the Department of Insurance. … The Florida legislature enacted a clear mandate in establishing the condition precedent. It is, without a doubt, a condition that must be satisfied in order for one to perfect the right to sue under the statute.
Cited 15 timesPublishedLiberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Orlando Museum of Art, Inc.
District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 20, 2025
It explained: The forum-defendant rule clearly contemplates Plaintiff's ability to defeat [d]efendants’ purported right of removal in this case. … Thus, the BVCG Defendants have not established by clear and convincing evidence that “there is no possibility” that Plaintiffs can establish a cause of action for declaratory judgment against OMA under the unique circumstances
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna