Case law

Otero v. NewRez LLC

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 27, 2023

qualified immunity argument. … Qualified immunity protects governmental officials who perform discretionary functions from liability provided their conduct violates no “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Pilkington v. United Airlines, Inc.

921 F. Supp. 740 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 27, 1996

United then began to dismantle some of the strikebreaker protections it had established under Ferris. … Quite simply, Plaintiffs’ argument demonstrates their desperation to preserve a clearly stale claim.

Connell v. Nurse Sandvig

District Court, M.D. Florida · May 7, 2020

First, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity against Plaintiff’s section 1983 claims. … Qualified immunity protects a government official acting within his discretionary authority from civil lawsuits unless his conduct violates a statutory or constitutional right clearly established when the alleged violation

Swenson v. Palacek

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 12, 2021

protected under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … An officer sued in his individual capacity “is entitled to qualified immunity for his discretionary actions unless he violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Moss v. Inch

District Court, M.D. Florida · May 26, 2023

“Qualified immunity protects from civil liability government officials who perform discretionary functions if the conduct of the officials does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Moss’s allegations are sufficient to state a claim of a violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Thus, at this point, Eberlein is not entitled to qualified immunity on the failure to protect claim.

Florida National Bank v. United States

313 F. Supp. 1072 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 1, 1970

And, in these cases, the taxpayer has the burden of establishing that the amounts which will either be spent by the private beneficiary or reach the charity are thus accurately calculable. Cf. … Conversely, once the fixed standard is established, the second test will show whether it is possible to factually establish the portion which is assured to the charity as free from the contingency of invasion for private

North Star Capital Acquisitions, LLC v. Krig

611 F. Supp. 2d 1324 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 21, 2009

Supp 2d 1273, 1280 (S.D.Fla.2008) (claim that filing untimely state suit to collect a debt violated FCCPA is barred by the litigation privilege because the conduct “clearly relates to a judicial proceeding”); Pack v. … Counterclaim defendants also argue that the elements of an abuse of process claim have not been established.

Baysa v. Gualtieri

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 15, 2021

clearly established constitutional rights. 851 F. … Qualified immunity does not afford him immunity from suit.

Huggins v. School District of Manatee County

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 12, 2022

Saunders’ Motion to Dismiss asserts that five of the nine counts brought against her are barred by the doctrine of qualified immunity. Dkt. 42 at 5−10. … Accordingly, where a defendant raises the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, district courts should stay discovery until that immunity issue is resolved. See Crawford-El v.

Fuente Cigar, Ltd. v. Opus One

985 F. Supp. 1448 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 5, 1997

Expectations, however justified and however dearly purchased, cannot immunize future conduct from legislative fiat. … It is clearly limiting language, but the legislative history of the statute reveals an apparent schizophrenia as to how limiting it is.

Pritchard v. Fla. High Sch. Athletic Ass'n, Inc.

371 F. Supp. 3d 1081 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 19, 2019

In this Circuit, a preliminary injunction is "an extraordinary and drastic remedy not to be granted unless the movant clearly established the 'burden of persuasion' " as to *1085 each of the four prerequisites. … Accordingly, to establish a claim under the Rehabilitation Act, plaintiff must prove: (1) he has a disability as defined by the Act; (2) he is "otherwise qualified" to participate in high school athletics as regulated by

California Int'l Chemical Co. v. Neptune Pool Service, Inc.

770 F. Supp. 1530 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 2, 1991

Clearly, it does not appear beyond doubt that Plaintiffs can prove no set of facts entitling them to relief. … While the domiciliary of the Plaintiffs and Defendants does not establish diversity jurisdiction, it does establish that the alleged acts would have substantially affected interstate commerce.

Hughes v. Judd

108 F. Supp. 3d 1167 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 16, 2015

In Greason , reviewing the denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, we held that there exists a “clearly established right to have [one’s] psychotropic medication continued if discontinuation would amount … Although the issue arises in the context of qualified immunity, Taylor finds the applicable Eighth Amendment law “clearly established” and finds no claim under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Thundathil

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 21, 2025

More specifically on the latter point, “[q]ualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time … “To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must ‘plead[ ] facts showing (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged

Watkins v. Gualtieri

District Court, M.D. Florida · May 8, 2024

But if an officer’s force against a detainee violates no clearly established constitutional right, qualified immunity protects the officer from liability. … Because no law clearly established that Fox’s conduct violated a constitutional right, qualified im- munity applies.

Blessing v. Williams

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 5, 2020

The government official has the initial burden of establishing his entitlement to qualified immunity by proving that he was acting within the scope of his discretionary authority. Estate of Cummings v. … Once proven, the burden shifts to the plaintiff, who, to overcome qualified immunity, must demonstrate that the government actor violated a “clearly established statutory or constitutional right[] of which a reasonable

D. L. v. Hernando County Sheriff's Office

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 9, 2022

The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … qualified immunity is not appropriate.”

VALERIAN v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 1, 2025

But the Supreme Court has since revisited its approach to whether a limitations period qualifies as jurisdictional. In Wilkins v. … “If associating time limits with waivers of sovereign immunity clearly made those limits jurisdictional,” the equitable exceptions the Court has recognized (tolling, waiver, and estoppel) “would be just as clearly

Patrick v. McGuire

District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 15, 2024

authority is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) he violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of his conduct was clearly established at the time. … Thus, Defendants have established they are protected by qualified immunity.

Seaman v. Fleurjean

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 11, 2025

not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … To receive qualified immunity, an official must first “establish that he or she acted within the scope of discretionary authority when the allegedly wrongful acts occurred.” Robinson v.