Case law

Morgan v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (Nassau County)

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

Upon thorough review of the record, this Court concludes that the state court’s adjudication was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established … Upon thorough review of the record, this Court concludes that the state court’s adjudication was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established federal

Stalley v. ADS Alliance Data Systems, Inc.

997 F. Supp. 2d 1259 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 31, 2014

R.Civ.P. 23(b), and Stalley and Hallback failed to show that the proposed class is clearly ascertainable. 1 (Doc. # 304). ADS filed its present Renewed Motion for Final Summary Judgment on August 15, 2013. (Doc. # 243). … To establish a claim under the FSCA, the persons bringing suit must be Florida residents or the improper “interception” must have occurred in Florida. Cohen Bros., LLC v.

Green v. Secretary Florida Department Of Corrections (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 7, 2021

If the state court applied clearly established federal law to reasonably determined facts when . … The state court’s ruling was 19 _not contrary to and did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Beamon v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Duval County)

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

application 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. … application 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.

Howland v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 26, 2022

These regulations establish a “sequential evaluation process” to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. … Notably, however, the finding of any severe impairment, whether or not it results from a single severe impairment or a combination or impairments that together qualify as severe, is enough to satisfy step two.

Ratley v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 7, 2019

Clearly, Petitioner bears the burden to show extraordinary circumstances that are both beyond his control and unavoidable with diligence, and this high hurdle is not easily surmounted. … Finally, even if gross negligence qualifies as an extraordinary circumstance, Petitioner has not shown gross negligence on the part of his attorneys. Rutland v.

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

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

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.

Gibbs Properties Corp. v. Cigna Corp.

196 F.R.D. 430 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 16, 2000

Based on counsel’s extensive experience, it is clear that they are qualified to represent the plaintiff class. … H&R Block Tax Serv., Inc., 174 F.R.D. 78, 84 (N.D.Ill. 1997) (“[I]t is well-established that individual issues of reliance do not thwart class actions”).

Sparrow v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (St. Johns) County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 16, 2022

Upon thorough review of the record and the applicable law, the Court concludes 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 on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented.

Sugrin v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 22, 2025

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.”

United States v. Estate of Schoenfeld

344 F. Supp. 3d 1354 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 25, 2018

Here, regardless of whether the Estate qualifies as a proper defendant under Section 2404, the Government may not pursue its claim under the statute. … Notably, "where Congress has indicated an intention to establish a civil penalty,... 'only the clearest proof could suffice' " to establish that the penalty is penal in nature. United States v.

Hughlon v. State of Florida (Duval County)

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

Lloyd v. Leeper

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 4, 2023

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. … To establish a § 1983 malicious prosecution claim, Lloyd must prove the elements of the common law tort of malicious prosecution and a violation of his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizures.

Ellison-Mosley

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

May 11, 2016) (“[The p]laintiff should clearly state under each count the law under which [s]he is proceeding[,] clearly list what facts apply to that count[,] clearly explain under each count how the legal right implicated … (“Establishing a constructive discharge claim is a more onerous task than establishing a hostile work environment claim.”).

Dunkum v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Manatee County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 6, 2023

A federal habeas claim fails to qualify as “exhausted” where “the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies, and the court to which the petitioner would be required to present his claims in order to meet the exhaustion … This analysis is neither contrary to clearly established federal law nor an unreasonable application of Strickland.

Judge v. Knauf Gips KG

District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 28, 2024

The Eleventh Circuit found that Pulte had not established that there was damage to “other property.” … Most of the damages Plaintiff seeks qualify as economic damages which are not recoverable in product liability tort claims.

Lay v. Storm Smart Building Systems, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 19, 2024

One method to establish a prima facie case of an ADEA violation is for the plaintiff to “show[] that he (1) was a member of the protected age group, (2) was subjected to adverse employment action, (3) was qualified to do … Plaintiff has wholly failed to sufficiently plead claims establishing a prima facie case under either the ADEA, EPA, or Title VII.

Hammond v. Secretary Department of Corrections (St. Johns County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 30, 2023

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.

Martin-Godinez v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 6, 2024

Upon thorough review of the record, the Court finds that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. … Upon thorough review of the record, the Court finds that the state court’s adjudication of these claims was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law.

Rolando Ricardo Rodney v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 6, 2026

If the claim was “adjudicated on the merits” in state court, § 2254(d) bars relitigation of the claim unless the state court's decision (1) “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established … The trial court’s decision was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established law. First, the court identified Strickland as the ineffective assistance of counsel standard.