Case law

Kornagay

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 20, 2026

Kornagay’s allegations, taken as true, might also establish deliberate indifference. … That is, Kornagay must notice the depositions and hire and designate an officer qualified to take them. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 31(a)(3), (b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 28(a.

Nuvasive, Inc. v. LeDuff

District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 13, 2019

It was not until the hearing that NuVasive identified LeDuff’s position as a sales representative qualified him as a “Spinal Specialist” under the PIIA. LeDuff did not rebuff that characterization. … Because preliminary injunctions are an extraordinary remedy, this relief is appropriate only if the movant clearly establishes the burden of persuasion on each element. Seigel, 234 F.3d at 1180.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Sky Way Global, LLC

710 F. Supp. 2d 1274 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 1, 2010

After a week of fines, the CEO makes the same promise, but this time on his knees and with his hands clearly visible so that the court can see that the CEO’s fingers are not crossed. … Immunity is once more obtained because the new plan was not specifically enjoined. And so a whole series of wrongs is perpetrated and a decree of enforcement goes for naught.

Turner v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 27, 2020

That case, which relied on Florida law, does not establish that the First DCA’s decision here was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the United States Supreme … He further contends that the First DCA’s rejection of this claim was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Fazio v. Monsanto Company

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 10, 2019

The evidence in the record clearly demonstrates Island Garden Center was not incorporated until 2010 and could not be held liable for sales of Roundup that took place before then. … Monsanto’s argument fails because the declaration does not qualify as “other paper” under § 1446(b)(3).

Rodriguez-Bonilla v. Ivey

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 5, 2021

The second part requires that the findings of this pre- suit investigation be corroborated by a qualified medical expert: Corroboration of reasonable grounds to initiate medical negligence litigation shall … Nurse Taylor clearly believes that the Armor Defendants’ actions fell below the applicable standard of care and ends her opinion by noting that Edwards died the next day.

St. Louis v. City of Cape Coral

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 26, 2024

In other words, “[w]e do not ask whether the employer selected the ‘most’ qualified candidate, but only whether it selected the candidate based on an unlawful motive.” Denney, 247 F.3d at 1188. … Mulhall, 19 F.3d at 598 (“Clearly, if plaintiff makes a prima facie case under the EPA, she simultaneously establishes facts necessary to go forward on a Title VII claim”) (citing EEOC v.

Colbert v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 23, 2021

App’x 842, 845 (11th Cir. 2017) (“An impairment that manifests only some of [the] criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.”) (quoting Sullivan v. … A claimant may establish “disability through his own testimony of pain or other subjective symptoms.” Dyer v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 1206, 1210 (11th Cir. 2005).

Spigot, Inc. v. Hoggatt

District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 23, 2020

Plaintiffs, as the parties invoking federal jurisdiction, bear the burden of establishing these elements, and at the pleading stage, plaintiffs must “clearly . . . allege facts demonstrating” each … Both the federal and Florida statutes define “misappropriation” to include certain disclosures or uses of a trade secret by a qualifying person.

Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security

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

Rather, to establish a disability based on testimony of pain and other symptoms, the claimant must establish evidence of an underlying medical condition and either (1) objective medical evidence confirming the severity … [Plaintiff] clearly cannot work an eight[-]hour day without interruptions from her fatigue, chronic pain, and psychological problems.

Tobin v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 14, 2019

The ALJ also failed to clearly state his reasoning for giving different weight to Dr. Brogan’s and Dr. … Prusinski’s opinions little weigh, he failed to clearly articulate his reasoning for doing so. See Wilson v.

Sheppard v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 29, 2023

“The focus . . . is on whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law is objectively unreasonable, . . . an unreasonable application is different from an incorrect one.” Bell v. … 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, 529 U.S. at 412.

Mullin v. Secretary, U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs

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

To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act, a plaintiff must demonstrate that: (1) she has a disability; (2) she was a “qualified … The record clearly reflects that Mullin requested advanced sick leave in May 2012 and Director Witty approved the request one week later. (Doc. # 32 at ¶ 20; Doc. # 34 at ¶ 20).

Figueroa v. Department of Health and Human Services

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 13, 2025

In May 2013, Plaintiff established Mutual Family Health, LLC (“MFH”) operating as a medical clinic for individuals who received health care benefits through the U.S. … This was clearly within the bounds of the delegated authority.

Smith v. City of Atlantic Beach

District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 12, 2020

Stated another way, “judicial claims are allowed if they ‘amplify, clarify, or more clearly focus’ the allegations in the EEOC complaint . . . .” Gregory, 355 F.3d at 1279 (quoting Wu, 863 F.2d at 1547). … This means that “a plaintiff making a retaliation claim under [Title VII] must establish that his or her protected activity was a but-for cause of the alleged adverse action by the employer.”

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

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

The Court finds that the state court’s adjudication was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. … Thus, 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.

Schofield v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 26, 2024

The Magistrate Judge further found that “Plaintiff’s suggestion that the term ‘medical opinion’ is not defined in the regulations, and therefore, her treatment notes qualify as medical opinions, is without merit.” … She adds that like the Commissioner, the Magistrate Judge also ignored that pain is inherently subjective, and that disability may be established by a claimant’s own testimony.

Lowmack v. American Air Conditioning & Heating Solutions, LLC

District Court, M.D. Florida · May 3, 2022

The Court concluded that this requirement was not jurisdictional because Congress did not “clearly state[]” that it was jurisdictional. Id. at 515; see Gonzalez v. … Failure to State a Discrimination Claim under the ADA or FCRA To establish a prima facie case under the ADA or the FCRA, Lowmack must show that 1) he has a disability, 2) he is a qualified individual, and

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

District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 9, 2024

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 … 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.

Brown v. BellSouth Telecommunications Inc.

73 F. Supp. 2d 1308 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 4, 1999

Clearly the idea of returning to her previous place of employment is objectionable to her and resolution of whether or not she will return to work should remove some stress from the current situation. … That statutory section, however, does not establish a standard of judicial review. The Supreme Court, in Firestone Tire and Rubber Co. v.