Case law

GALE FORCE ROOFING AND RESTORATION LLC v. BROWN

District Court, N.D. Florida · Jul 11, 2021

C It is well-established that while a state may not be sued unless it waives its sovereign immunity or that immunity is abrogated by Congress, Kimel v. Fla. … Defendant is clearly a proper party. Indeed, nobody, not even Defendant, disputes this.

Wooten v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, FLORIDA a & M UNIV.

426 F. Supp. 2d 1261 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Jan 10, 2006

Humphries gave her a $12,000 raise in 2001, but that hardly qualifies as an admission that she had suffered racial discrimination. … Under that framework, the plaintiff has the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case.

GLICK v. CORBIN

District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 14, 2021

claims and dismiss the complaint, or any portion thereof, if the complaint “(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Plaintiff’s complaint clearly fails to satisfy the second and third prongs of an ADA claim.

COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE v. FORMAN

District Court, N.D. Florida · Jun 10, 2022

When both prongs are met, a qualified First Amendment right attaches. … Under that standard, once the qualified First Amendment right of access has been established, a “presumption of access arises under Press-Enterprise II that may be restricted only if ‘closure is essential to preserve higher

Williams v. First Advantage LNS Screening Solutions, Inc.

155 F. Supp. 3d 1233 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 14, 2015

Under the facts of this case, neither type of action qualifies as an “ad *1246 verse action” within the meaning of the FCRA. … The fact that they were performed instead by First Advantage using criteria established by the employers does not change the analysis.

DREAM DEFENDERS v. LEE

District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 9, 2020

It is well-established that while a state may not be sued unless it waives its sovereign immunity or that immunity is abrogated by Congress, Kimel v. Fla. … Clearly, the website crash had some effect on voter registration.

Chatham Steel Corp. v. Brown

858 F. Supp. 1130 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Jul 19, 1994

Parties who qualify as “arrangers” under § 107(a)(3) may be held liable for the costs incurred by the Government and other parties in cleaning up a hazardous waste site. Id. at § 9607(a)(4)(A) and (B). … These claims, however, conflict with the fact Sapp’s address was clearly printed on the checks Carolina Scrap received for the batteries.

Watson Construction Co. v. City of Gainesville

433 F. Supp. 2d 1269 · District Court, N.D. Florida · May 23, 2006

The trick lies in clearly distinguishing the two and then delineating other claims that are sometimes mistakenly labeled as due process. … Watson stated in its complaint that it “did not qualify for any of the exemptions or hardship provisions of the moratorium as set forth in Sections 4 or 5 of the moratorium ordinance.” See doc. 1-2 at 43, ¶ 204.

BARNES v. LEON COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD

District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 24, 2025

To establish a prima facie case, Barnes must show “(1) she belongs to a protected class; (2) she was subjected to an adverse employment action; (3) she was qualified to perform the job in question; and (4) her employer … The exhibits do not clearly establish which candidates applied for which positions.

KENDRICK v. TECHFIVE LLC

District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 29, 2024

She very clearly picked favorites which was the cause of 4 people to just quit. … But the undisputed evidence, proffered by Kendrick, clearly shows otherwise.

MOULTRIE v. GIELOW

District Court, N.D. Florida · Apr 17, 2025

The Court is required to screen Plaintiff’s amended complaint (Doc. 10) to determine whether it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a plausible claim for relief, or seeks monetary relief from immune … Here, Plaintiff is clearly seeking monetary relief for his allegedly lost gain-time.

FLORIDIANS PROTECTING FREEDOM INC v. LADAPO

District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 17, 2024

The Plaintiff must “clearly establish[] the burden of persuasion as to the four prerequisites.” Schiavo, 403 F.3d at 1231 (internal quotations omitted). None of the four elements are controlling. … At the hearing, Defendant led with the argument that laws of general applicability are immune from First Amendment challenge. Nonsense.

DWIGGINS v. BERRYHILL

District Court, N.D. Florida · Sep 19, 2019

The claimant bears the burden of establishing a severe impairment that keeps her from performing her past work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1512. … Asked about her fibromyalgia and auto immune disease, Plaintiff stated that her symptoms progressed faster than she thought they would.

Keohane v. Jones

328 F. Supp. 3d 1288 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Aug 22, 2018

Accordingly, Eleventh Amendment immunity bars this claim for damages against Defendant. See Doe v. Univ. of Ala. in Huntsville , 177 F.Supp.3d 1380 , 1395 (N.D. Ala. 2016) (citing Will v. … Levine's or any other qualified expert in this case.

JONES v. DESANTIS

District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 18, 2019

Other dictionaries probably articulate the same concept in ways more clearly applicable to a sentence. … This order’s preliminary injunction does not explicitly address any such challenge, but as should be clear from what has been said to this point, an otherwise-qualified felon who establishes genuine inability to pay—either

Gloetzner v. Lynch

225 F. Supp. 3d 1329 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Dec 2, 2016

In the McDonnell Douglas analysis, the plaintiff first must establish a prima facie case of age discrimination by showing that the plaintiff was “(1) a member of a protected age class (over 40), (2) was qualified for the … demonstrate to establish a prima-facie case of retaliation.”

Gallardo ex rel. Vassallo v. Dudek

263 F. Supp. 3d 1247 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Apr 18, 2017

That is because “ ‘[i]f the statute speaks clearly to the precise question at issue, [courts] must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress.’ ” Jackson v. Comm’r of Soc. … In Florida, not even a jury’s allocation is immune from the reimbursement . statute.

HEAGNEY v. SECRETARY FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

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

On this issue, the “clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” is set out in two decisions: Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012 (1988), and Maryland v. … Defense counsel objected that Litz was not qualified as a psychologist or psychiatrist.

B&R Capital, LLC v. Waycross Management, LLC, et al.

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

“A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy, and [the plaintiff] bears the burden of persuasion to clearly establish all four of these prerequisites.” Id. … Adams is qualified and suitable to serve in that capacity. Accordingly, the Court finds that Mr. Adams should be appointed as a special fiduciary.

Coastal & Native Plant Specialties, Inc. v. Engineered Textile Products, Inc.

139 F. Supp. 2d 1326 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Mar 28, 2001

a contract for sale although the writings of the parties do not otherwise establish a contract. … Clearly, ETP and OxyChem are merchants. As such, their transactions were "between merchants.”