Case law

Kazanzas v. Walt Disney World Co.

518 F. Supp. 292 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 14, 1981

That notice clearly advises of the need for compliance with the 180 day filing provision. … Aside from the fact that the court lacks such authority, the jury’s finding was clearly justified by the evidence.

Hoever v. Whitehead

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 25, 2024

immunity. … Hoever responds that he states a claim for relief, and Deputy Whitehead is not entitled to immunity because he violated a clearly established constitutional right.

United States v. Turtle

365 F. Supp. 3d 1242 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 4, 2019

Its reservations were established in 1911 by President Taft through Executive Order No. 1379. … Congress clearly has the authority to limit the rights of tribal members through legislation even in absence of a treaty.

Alton v. Robinson

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

He also maintains that he is entitled to qualified immunity. See id. at 15-16. … Because Defendant Officers have established that they were acting within the scope of their discretionary authority, the burden shifts to [the plaintiff] to demonstrate that qualified immunity

Doty v. City of Tampa

947 F. Supp. 468 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 18, 1996

QUASI-JUDICIAL IMMUNITY The second issue raised by the defendants is whether hearing masters Manelli and Cannon are absolutely immune from liability. … While it is true that Doty is suing inspector Smith and hearing masters Manelli and Cannon in both their individual and official capacities, the line between these two capacities is not clearly drawn in the complaint.

Turner v. Williams

District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 17, 2020

However, regardless of which standard is applied, the law was not clearly established at the time and Williams is entitled to qualified immunity. See infra pp. 21–22. … “Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”

Belknap v. Hartford Life and Accident Ins. Co.

389 F. Supp. 2d 1320 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 9, 2005

Whether the insurance policy at issue falls within ERISA depends on whether the insurance policy qualifies as an “employee benefit plan.” … Even so, the Court finds that the SPD clearly evidences that the plan is both “established” and “maintained” by Wal-Mart.

Lane v. Batchelor

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 14, 2021

Generally, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … To defeat qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that “when the defendant acted, the law established the 16 contours of a right so clearly that

Small v. Hudson

322 F. Supp. 519 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 18, 1970

School boards such as the respondent then operating state-compelled dual systems were nevertheless clearly charged with the affirmative duty to take whatever steps might be necessary to convert to a unitary system in which … Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.” . 42 U.S.C. § 2000a-l provides : “All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment

Brooks v. City of Clearwater

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 1, 2023

Even if Roseto personally violated Brooks’s rights, qualified immunity protects Roseto from a suit unless Roseto violated a “clearly established statutory or constitu- tional right[] of which a reasonable person would have … To invoke qualified immunity, Roseto must show that he acted “within the scope of his discretionary authority.” Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1346.

Johnston v. Carlson

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 17, 2023

The deputies move (Doc. 14) to dismiss the complaint as a shotgun pleading and for failure to allege facts overcoming each deputy’s qualified immunity. … conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person 2 Under the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment applies to state actors.

Thomas

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 15, 2026

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.” Id. at 412. … 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.”

A. Duda & Sons, Inc. v. United States

383 F. Supp. 1303 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 21, 1974

Only 69% acres of that unit were planted in less than a month of fiscal year 1962, and the entire unit clearly cannot qualify as land used in farming. … The quality of the purebred herd is maintained by culling out those animals which do not meet certain objective standards established for deciding which animals do not qualify for retention.

Warren v. Devanguardia

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 26, 2025

immunity, statutory immunity, and shotgun pleading. … Jan. 8, 2025) (explaining that the court could not determine the applicability of qualified immunity because of the shotgun nature of the pleading); Smith v.

Newcome v. Hernando County Sheriff's Office

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 8, 2022

Qualified Immunity Because qualified immunity is immunity from a suit rather than a mere defense to liability, it is important to address at the earliest possible stage … a clearly established constitutional right.10 This standard requires a plaintiff to point to binding Eleventh Circuit or Supreme Court law.

Scheffler v. Chitwood

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 22, 2024

In the motion, Chitwood asserted qualified immunity for the individual-capacity claims against him. (Id. at 4–12.) … - immunity issue.

Johnston-Loehner v. O'BRIEN

859 F. Supp. 575 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 9, 1994

Plaintiff correctly contends that the Defendants’ asserted interest in avoiding violation of the Establishment Clause is invalid because permitting student distribution of religious materials does not violate the Establishment … However, the Establishment Clause forbids government to inhibit as well as to advance religion. A ban on all student religious speech clearly inhibits religion.

Deppe v. Sovinski

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 20, 2024

In their Response, Defendants assert that amendment would be futile because Plaintiff’s proposed second amended complaint still fails to overcome Defendants’ qualified immunity defense. … Since a determination of qualified immunity in this case will require a complex factual analysis, the Court cannot say that the proposed amendment is clearly insufficient or frivolous on its face. See Taylor, 875 F.

Lancer Arabians, Inc. v. Beech Aircraft Corp.

723 F. Supp. 1444 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 10, 1989

Section 768.72 “defines the conditions the plaintiff must meet to recover punitive damages____ [It] is clearly substantive because it sets the standard for establishing a claim for punitive damages .... … Notice-of-claim statutes are integral to the State’s waiver of sovereign immunity and hence receive special solicitude. See Felder, 108 S.Ct. at 2308 -09 & 2314. 4 .

Blake v. Young

District Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 11, 2024

Also, as to Defendants’ argument that they are entitled to qualified immunity: “The defense of qualified immunity completely protects … Thus, at the pleading stage, Defendant are not entitled to qualified immunity.