Case law

PEPE v. PIVACHEK

District Court, N.D. Florida · May 22, 2025

Plaintiff states that Defendant “failed to act sua sponte to dismiss [state cases], thereby violating clearly established law.” (Id. at 2). … . did not establish that they acted in clear absence of jurisdiction”).

JACKSON v. SUMP

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

After reviewing the parties’ submissions, the 1 Sump also argues Jackson failed to state a claim for excessive force, he is protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity, and Jackson is barred from recovering punitive … 3 Jackson answered “yes” to this question and identified four state court cases as being response, the undersigned presumes Jackson wants an extension to respond to the qualified immunity, failure to

Hill v. Xerox Corp.

998 F. Supp. 1378 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Feb 2, 1998

Hill had to establish that he was in the protected age group, that his employment was involuntarily terminated, that he was qualified to do the job, and perhaps that he was replaced by a younger person. … Hill had to establish that he was in the protected age group, that his employment was involuntarily terminated, and that he was qualified for his current position or to assume another position, and, in addition, Mr.

Slagle v. ITT Hartford Insurance Group

904 F. Supp. 1346 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Sep 11, 1995

While that might have been cumbersome and expensive, it would have not have been a boycott because the concerted activity would have been clearly directed to the terms of the contracts issued. … That case concerned state-action immunity from antitrust laws. 504 U.S. at 630 , 112 S.Ct. at 2175 .

In re Abilify (Aripiprazole) Prods. Liab. Litig.

299 F. Supp. 3d 1291 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 15, 2018

Bechara clearly cites in his expert report, see Bechara Rep., ECF No. 423-1 at 12. Moreover, at the Daubert hearing, Dr. … Because its mechanism of action involves dopamine, Abilify is clearly a dopaminergic medication. The parties' experts agree.

May v. Harper

306 F. Supp. 1222 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Nov 28, 1969

The evidence falls far short of establishing that it was. Mr. … That they have done so does not, and should not, mean the sale of obscenity contrary to law before that determination is constitutionally immunized.

Wilson v. Silcox

151 F. Supp. 2d 1345 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 7, 2001

Bracknell, 869 F.2d 1467, 1468 (11th Cir. 1989) (noting that if an inmate is disciplined as “the result of his having filed a grievance concerning the conditions of his imprisonment, he” has clearly “raised a constitutional … Furthermore, as illustrated supra, the defense of qualified immunity is inapplicable here as it was clearly established in 1999 that a correctional officer could not retaliate against an inmate because he had filed a § 1983

Hill v. Butterworth

170 F.R.D. 509 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Jan 16, 1997

As a result, CCR’s attorneys are qualified to act as class counsel. … Angelone, the court held that the statute did not qualify as standards, but instead were merely guidelines for the establishment of such standards.

Florida Pharmacy Ass'n v. Cook

17 F. Supp. 2d 1293 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Sep 4, 1998

Thus the state clearly must adopt a payment structure and payment rates that will achieve these results. … Although § 1983 refers to “rights, privileges or immunities,” the applicable Supreme Court and Eleventh Circuit decisions generally speak of "rights.”

Hawkins v. Board of Control of Florida

162 F. Supp. 851 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Jun 18, 1958

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., not only on behalf of himself, but also on behalf of other persons similarly situated, that is to say, Negro citizens of the United States and of the State of Florida who are qualified … When it comes to the relief that should be granted upon the class action feature of the case, the Court finds and holds that the evidence submitted by defendants clearly shows that the injunctive relief granted by this Court

LOWRIE v. MCCOLLOUGH

District Court, N.D. Florida · Dec 10, 2024

The prisoner must establish that the prison official “acted with a sufficiently culpable state of mind” and that the official’s conduct was “objectively harmful enough to establish a constitutional violation.” … Isbell, 207 F.3d 1253, 1258 (11th Cir. 2000) (“[A] minimal amount of force and injury . . . will not defeat an officer’s qualified immunity.”).

LORUSSO

District Court, N.D. Florida · Apr 17, 2026

These cases qualify as “strikes” under § 1915(g). … Here, LoRusso’s allegations do not establish he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Landreth v. Hopkins

331 F. Supp. 920 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Sep 22, 1971

‘No citizen or member of the community is immune from prosecution, in good faith, for his alleged criminal acts. … Having determined existence for equitable relief has not been established, the request for declaratory relief founders as well. Samuels, supra; Boyle, supra; LeFlore et al. v.

LEIPHART v. WARRICK

District Court, N.D. Florida · Apr 29, 2025

Judge Warrick is entitled to absolute judicial immunity. … Marys, Ga., 787 F.2d 1496, 1499 (11th Cir. 1986) (“To establish a policy or custom, it is generally necessary to show a persistent and wide-spread practice.

RENNER v. SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

District Court, N.D. Florida · Nov 1, 2019

A motion to dismiss for lack jurisdiction—this includes Eleventh Amendment immunity—can properly challenge the sufficiency of a complaint’s jurisdictional allegations or the sufficiency of the actual facts to establish … The motions also rely on evidence to establish the facts relevant to Eleventh Amendment immunity from the Rehabilitation Act claims.

Letner v. UNUM Life Insurance Co. of America

203 F. Supp. 2d 1291 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Aug 3, 2001

Due to the lack of necessary information on the record, and although clearly not required, the court provided the parties with the opportunity to submit additional evidence on the jurisdictional issue. (Doc. 10). … Without any supporting authority, UNUM states that this discount should qualify for an employer contribution. (Doc. 11 ¶ 20). Defendant’s argument is against the weight of authority.

Hendrix v. Evenflo Co.

255 F.R.D. 568 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Jan 28, 2009

Because any opinion that Evenflo was negligent is clearly a legal conclusion which Whitman is not qualified to offer, this opinion will be excluded. … The courts have established certain legal standards to ensure the reliability and logical correctness of an expert’s differential diagnosis opinion.

Solomon v. Liberty County, Fla.

957 F. Supp. 1522 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 31, 1997

fee and they can’t afford to qualify for the elections.” … Finally, Plaintiff Solomon opined that racial prejudice must have caused him to lose his election because he was “clearly the more qualified candidate.” 112 Id. at 79.

Morris v. Buss

776 F. Supp. 2d 1293 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 7, 2011

The law is “clearly established” if Supreme Court precedent at the time “would have compelled a particular result in the case.” Neelley v. … application of clearly established federal law.

Florida Residential Property & Casualty Joint Underwriting Ass'n v. United States

207 F. Supp. 2d 1344 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Feb 7, 2002

N at § 25), and the JUA has been granted immunity from suit or liability for damages. … The State of Florida, through the DOI, clearly controls the JUA. 19 Most notably, a majority (in actuality, all) of the JUA’s Board of Governors are appointed by the Florida Insurance Commissioner. 20 The reasons for establishing