Case law

In re Brican America LLC Equipment Lease Litigation

977 F. Supp. 2d 1287 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 1, 2013

In Jones , the record demonstrated that after a witness told a defendant that his bank records had been subpoenaed and that the witness was likely to be served with a subpoena to testify under a grant of immunity, the defendant … combination of Plaintiff Quiroz’s attempt to tamper with witnesses by providing them a portion of his court award in exchange of favorable testimony, his perjured affidavit and his dishonest testimony at the evidentiary hearing clearly

Aerovias Interamericanas De Panama, S.A. v. Board of County Commissioners

197 F. Supp. 230 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 20, 1961

It is a well established principle of international law that each state is responsible for its internal governmental machinery. … Fifth ■Circuit Court of Appeals, in a case involving the Broward County Port Authority, which body was organized under a Special Act of the Florida Legislature similar to the one which created the defendant, held that the immunity

United States v. Blucher

730 F. Supp. 428 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 8, 1990

The Court will not consider this clearly preposterous suggestion.- The Defendant’s proposed testimony is described in his attached affidavit. (See DE 783, Exhibit D). … Finally, in order to qualify as “newly discovered” for purposes of Rule 33, evidence must be discovered subsequent to the trial proceeding. United States v. Di-Bernardo, 880 F.2d at 1224 .

Hernandez v. United States

District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 18, 2025

United States, 260 F.3d 1316, 1318 (11th Cir. 2001) (“It is well established that the FTCA is a specific waiver of the sovereign immunity of the United States and must be strictly construed.”). … Plaintiffs argue that the June 2022 email should qualify as “constructively filed” because those employees should have forwarded Plaintiffs’ SF-95 forms to the appropriate tort claim coordinator.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Monterosso

746 F. Supp. 2d 1253 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 28, 2010

Thus, the Court should either deny the Commission’s request outright or direct the Commission to clearly catalogue each of the statements it seeks to be established as fact. … After a use immunity agreement was reached, authorities interviewed Lynch on July 15, 2008. On February 11, 2009, the Commission deposed Lynch.

Gomez v. United States

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 27, 2021

He argues that “has met his burden under Beeman to establish that the sentencing court likely relied solely on the residual clause in finding that his 1983 Florida arson conviction qualified as an ACCA ‘violent crime.’ … April 28, 2018) (“Edwards I”), for the proposition that this additional language “clearly brings Florida first-degree arson outside of the generic definition of arson.” (Objections, 6).

Katz v. Chevaldina

127 F. Supp. 3d 1285 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 17, 2015

Id. at *8 (noting that awarding interest is “clearly not the norm, especially in context of fees awarded under the Copyright Act of 1976”). … Houghton Mifflin Co., 268 F.3d 1257, 1265 (11th Cir.2001) (“copyright does not immunize a work from comment and criticism”).

Friedenberg v. School Board of Palm Beach County

257 F. Supp. 3d 1295 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 14, 2017

Plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the three elements comprising the “irreducible constitutional minimum of standing.” Id. First, Plaintiff must establish an injury-in-fact. … Because Plaintiff is not entitled to a preliminary injunction unless she establishes each of the four prerequisites, the Court need not address whether she has established the remaining three. See Palmer v.

Dada v. Campbell

District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 1, 2023

T-Mobile USA, Inc., 564 F.3d 1256, 1272 (11th Cir. 2009) (“For a breach of contract claim, Florida law requires the plaintiff to plead and establish: (1) the existence of a contract; (2) a material breach of that contract … Claims that are based on meritless legal theories include, for example, “claims against which it is clear that the defendants are immune from suit, . . . and claims of infringement of a legal interest which clearly does

Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Sterling Trading Group, Inc.

605 F. Supp. 2d 1245 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 20, 2009

Since, as previously discussed, QIX does not qualify for this exclusion, the full regulatory scheme applies in the case at bar. … The Complaint clearly alleges the basis for liability with respect to each Count and each Defendant, and is not vague, ambiguous, or confusing.

Louis v. Nelson

544 F. Supp. 973 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 18, 1982

While it appeared some of these individuals were clearly excludable, the evidence was insufficient to establish that they had similar immigration status but were treated differently than Plaintiffs. … Civiletti, 617 F.2d 745 (D.C.Cir.1979) are clearly distinguishable from the case sub judice.

Berry v. United States

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

First, Beeman remains binding precedent in the Eleventh Circuit and establishes the burden a movant must carry to obtain relief on a successive section 2255 motion raising a Davis claim. … that under the prior precedent rule, “courts in the Eleventh Circuit must follow a previous decision of the Eleventh Circuit ‘even when a subsequent Supreme Court case weakens that decision,’” unless the precedent is clearly

J.P.M. ex rel. C.M. v. Palm Beach County School Board

916 F. Supp. 2d 1314 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 30, 2013

While C.M. is verbal and can engage in a short conversation, his disabilities present problems with expressive language and prohibit him from communicating clearly. Compl. ¶ 21; Ex. 0 at 37-38. 3. … the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132 . *1325 To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADA, plaintiffs will

United States v. Sharfi

District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 1, 2022

This is sufficient to establish that the photographs and videos are work product. 4 The Response states that the photographs and videos belong to Mr. Sharfi. DE 58 at 1. Given that Mr. … Accordingly, the Response does not argue that the photographs and videos are opinion work product, nor do I otherwise observe that they qualify as opinion work product.

Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Mobil Oil Corp.

512 F. Supp. 1231 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 1, 1981

Although even a one-time spot sale with no written agreement would qualify as a “binding contract,” see FEA Ruling 1977-5, 3 CCH Energy Mgt. ¶ 16,069 at 16,738-39, Dougan’s review revealed that the only sales of jet fuel … Clearly, there is a factual dispute as to whether Mobil actually maintained the records required by 10 C.F.R. § 210.92 .

In Re Managed Care Litigation

135 F. Supp. 2d 1253 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 2, 2001

Yet the Court in Pe-gram did not fashion an all-encompassing cloak of immunity for the health care industry. … Burford allows a federal court to abstain only under extraordinary circumstances in which the state’s interests are clearly paramount.

Adelson v. U.S. Legal Support, Inc.

715 F. Supp. 2d 1265 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 27, 2010

The defendants do not dispute that the plaintiffs’ attorneys are qualified to serve as class counsel. … The modification of “acting reasonably” by “in the same circumstances” indicates a hybrid standard that may be objectively established as to mindset but subjectively established as to context.

In Re Motions to Certify Classes

715 F. Supp. 2d 1265 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 27, 2010

The defendants do not dispute that the plaintiffs' attorneys are qualified to serve as class counsel. … The modification of "acting reasonably" by "in the same circumstances" indicates a hybrid standard that may be objectively established as to mindset but subjectively established as to context.

Hanchey

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

Here, Plaintiff’s allegations fail to plausibly establish protected activity or causation. … Second, Plaintiff fails to clearly connect any decisionmaker to knowledge of the request.

Hayes v. Starling

District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 19, 2020

App’x 856, 859 (11th Cir. 2013) (affirming that qualified immunity was appropriate where a cavity search, as part of a routine cell search, implicated the “strong considerations” in favor of needing to maintain [institutional … In addition, Plaintiff’s allegations do not establish a causal connection.