Case law

Cook v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

557 F. Supp. 2d 1367 · District Court, M.D. Florida · May 8, 2008

Plaintiff argues in response that there is ample evidence of breach in the record and that he has “clearly presented a jury issue regarding liability and damages.” (Doc. No. 79 at p. 18.) A. … Johanning since he qualifies as an expert witness under Federal Rule of Evidence 702.

Cineus v. Florida Department of Corrections.

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 23, 2022

negligent supervision claim (Count Three) and contends that Cineus fails to allege that (1) the Department had a duty to supervise Centurion’s staff, that (2) the Department knew that Centurion’s staff were not qualified … To establish a custom, “it is generally necessary to show a persistent and wide-spread practice.” Church v. City of Huntsville, 30 F.3d 1332, 1345 (11th Cir. 1994) (quoting Depew v. City of St.

Thornton v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Clay County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · May 24, 2021

of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings. … of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings.

Mahon v. U.S. Department of Agriculture

426 F. Supp. 2d 1283 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 7, 2006

Although federal regulations do not require producers to be registered or licensed by a state to sell nursery crops to qualify for disaster relief, the regulations also do not define “commercial sale” and the agency’s interpretation … However, the regulations, when read as whole, clearly contemplate § 11.6(b) as the sole avenue for appealing an agency’s adverse decision.

PB Legacy, Inc. v. American Mariculture, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 10, 2020

The relevant contract principles are well established under Florida law. … Because Defendants have not established this duty element, the Court finds that Defendants have failed to carry their burden in establishing their entitlement to summary judgment based on qualified

United States v. Long

958 F. Supp. 2d 1334 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 23, 2013

524 (1991), in which the Supreme Court, relying on both the plain meaning of the statute and congressional intent to use a “market-oriented” approach, held that LSD combined with blotter paper, a common carrier medium, qualified … The Court observed [t]he Sentencing Guidelines Statutory Mission and Policy Statement clearly and plainly indicate that the primary purpose of the guidelines system is to create a scheme of “uniform and rational” sentencing

Charlie Edwin Rogers v. Naphcare Medical, et al.

District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 8, 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 … 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.” 2 Rogers also

Ford v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · May 3, 2021

of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented. … of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented.

Henderson v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Polk County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 16, 2023

For purposes of § 2254(d)(1), the phrase “clearly established Federal law” encompasses the holdings only of the United States Supreme Court “as of the time of the relevant state-court decision.” Williams v. … 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.”

Taylor v. Shandex Truck, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 22, 2021

“In fairness to the parties and their ability to put on their case, a court should exclude evidence in limine only when it is clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds.” United States v. Gonzalez, 718 F. … As such, Montano is not qualified as an expert and may not give an opinion on this subject.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Kirkland

521 F. Supp. 2d 1281 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 25, 2007

The Court held “[t]he existence of a state cease and desist order against identical instruments is clearly relevant to a reasonable investor, who is naturally interested in whether management is following the law in marketing … As such, the offerings must be registered in accordance with securities regulations or else qualify for an exemption. Kirkland did not register the securities he offered, nor did he argue that any exemption applies.

Wiand v. Waxenberg

611 F. Supp. 2d 1299 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 19, 2009

Based on the foregoing, Oscher is qualified, his methodology is reliable, and his opinion is relevant and helpful to the trier of fact. … Waxenberg, as the parties have not clearly distinguished all investments and payments made by and to the Trust. 2 .

Cameron

District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 10, 2026

application of clearly established federal law. … The Court does not find this statement qualifies as improper bolstering. See United States v.

Robinson v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 18, 2021

Thus, upon review of the record, this Court finds that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established … The Court finds that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, and was not based

Frederick v. Thompkins

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 15, 2022

He also asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 18-19. Additionally, Tompkins contends that Frederick fails to state plausible assault, battery, and negligence claims. Id. at 14-18. … Plaintiff’s request for summary judgment (Doc. 51) is DENIED. 22 In light of this conclusion, the Court need not address Tompkins’ argument on the issue of qualified immunity.

Stanton v. Astrue

617 F. Supp. 2d 1205 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 30, 2008

Without evidence of nerve root compression, Plaintiff cannot establish that his condition meets the criteria of Listing 1.04A. … Acceptable medical sources include licensed physicians; licensed or certified psychologists; licensed optometrists; licensed podiatrists; and qualified speech-language pathologists. Id.

Snair v. City of Clearwater

787 F. Supp. 1401 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 17, 1992

.” § 166.021(5), Fla.Stat. 2 The pension plan is mandatory, and provides that all qualified employees must join. … So read, a plan established in 1941, if bona fide, cannot be a subterfuge to evade an Act passed 26 years later. Id. at 434 U.S. 203 , 98 S.Ct. 450 .

Bailey v. Warden

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 20, 2020

Eleventh Amendment Immunity Defendants assert that, to the extent they are sued in their official capacities, they are entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. … Accordingly, in Zatler, the court found that the FDOC Secretary was immune from suit in his official capacity. Id.

Thompson v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

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

In any case, because Thompson has failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, Pino, Thompson’s dependent, Am. Compl. … Since a “preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy,” a court is not to grant it “unless the movant ‘clearly carries the burden of persuasion’ as to the four prerequisites.” , 720 F.2d

Taylor v. Montverde Academy, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 13, 2022

Generally, to satisfy the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction, a plaintiff must establish that a good faith estimated value of his or her claim against a defendant exceeds the statutorily … The amended complaint must clearly state the legal theory or theories upon which Plaintiffs seek relief and explain with factual allegations how defendant(s) are responsible.