Case law

Keystone Plastics, Inc. v. C & P PLASTICS, INC.

340 F. Supp. 55 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 14, 1972

time has not been unequivoeably established by Plaintiff and is somewhat doubtful, at least in part, it is not necessary for the Court to resolve that question here. 23. … This common expedient hardly qualifies as a trade secret; the Court finds it was not. *69 55. Claimed Trade Secret No. 14 is the use of a flying knife cutter (Gould 118, 119).

BellSouth Adv. & Pub. v. Donnelley Inf. Pub.

719 F. Supp. 1551 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 27, 1988

As direct evidence of copying, BAPCO submits that Donnelley's own admissions, as well as the testimony of Donnelley's own employees, clearly establish that Donnelley actually copied name, address, telephone number and classified … Thus, Donnelley's copying clearly does not fall under any of the listed excusable uses in the preamble to Section 107.

PG Restoration Company v. United Specialty Insurance Company

District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 11, 2024

A little while later, Colony filed its MTD, in which it asked us to dismiss Count IV of PG’s Amended Complaint because “[i]t is well-established . . . that a complaint seeking a declaratory judgment on the duty to indemnify … Power Co., 483 F.3d 1184, 1211 (11th Cir. 2007) (“If the jurisdictional amount is either stated clearly on the face of the documents before the court, or readily deducible from them, then the court has jurisdiction.”

Securities & Exchange Commission v. K.W. Brown & Co.

555 F. Supp. 2d 1275 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 4, 2008

The SEC established Defendants’ past violations of numerous securities laws. … Given these actions by the Defendants, any assurances the Defendants make against future violations are clearly disingenuous.

Janicijevic v. Classica Cruise Operator Ltd

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 7, 2021

Plaintiff has no interests antagonistic to those of the class and plaintiff’s counsel is qualified, experienced and generally able to conduct the proposed litigation. … (a) To be valid, the Request for Exclusion must clearly indicate the name, address, telephone number, and passport number of the Person seeking exclusion, the name and case number of the Action, a clear and unequivocal

Lanier v. CITY OF MIAMI

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 4, 2024

Specifically, “[t]he information disclosed . . . must include” one of the following to qualify as protected: (a) Any violation or suspected violation of … Lanier responds by copying some of the allegations in his amended complaint and asserting that he “clearly pled that he made a complaint in writing that the City was engaging in practices that violated Title VII and that

Island IP Acquisitions, LLC v. Antle

District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 8, 2023

An affirmative defense is insufficient as a matter of law where: ‘(1) in the face of the pleadings, it is patently frivolous, or (2) it is clearly invalid as a matter of law.’” Northrop & Johnson Holding Co., Inc. v. … establish non-use.”).

Derhem v. Bay House Miami Condominium Association

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 30, 2025

And Count IV alleged that Defendants, in violation of Chapter 718, “illegally refused to cooperate in the lease approval process for qualified tenants.” … Co., 560 U.S. 242, 253 (2010) (establishing that under the “bedrock principle known as the ‘American Rule,’” “[e]ach litigant pays his own attorney's fees, win or lose, unless a statute or contract provides otherwise”

Victor Porfirio Baloa Diaz, et al. v. EDI Korta LLC, et al.

District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 10, 2025

See ECF No. [82-2] at 8 (“Clearly, the Plaintiff is in breach of the Recording Agreement by virtue of the fact that he fraudulently registered copyrights for materials, nearly twenty years following the commercial release … Zigel is not qualified to testify about matters under Venezuelan law. damage calculation.

Hay v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 17, 2023

If the claimant establishes an inability to return to past relevant work, the inquiry turns to step five. … Berryhill, 883 F.3d 1102, 1110 n.7 (9th Cir. 2017) (noting that 25,000 positions nationwide qualifies as significant).

Perri v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Highland County)

District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 5, 2022

Under that provision, a federal court may grant habeas relief from a state court judgment only if the state court’s decision on the merits was (1) contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal … Having reviewed the state postconviction court’s order denying Grounds Four and Five, as well as the transcript of the evidentiary hearing, the Court concludes the state courts reasonably applied “clearly established Federal

United States Sugar Corporation v. Commerce and Industry Insurance Company

District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 2, 2023

The Court reserved ruling on what qualified as Defense Expenses in this order. (Id. at 10 n.5.) … While US Sugar clearly hoped that providing the pre- suit data would have the effect it ultimately did, it had no way of knowing that at the time.

Garcia v. Pajeoly Corp.

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

This factor weighs clearly and strongly toward employee status. g. Consideration of the factors The undisputed facts indicate that Garcia was an employee. … An individual “must either be involved in the day-to-day operation or have some direct responsibility for the supervision of the employee” in order to qualify as an FLSA employer. Gonzalez v.

Donovan v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 10, 2020

City of Miami Beach, 707 F.3d 1244, 1247 (11th Cir. 2013) (affirming order denying defendant’s summary judgment motion on qualified immunity because of factual issue). … Nevertheless, evidence that a ship owner has taken corrective action can establish notice of a dangerous or defective condition.

Azure College, Inc. v. Bank of America Corporation

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 16, 2022

This provision clearly incorporates the NACHA Rules by reference. … Plaintiff appears to have abandoned this argument, potentially because, as referenced in Defendant’s Response, [ECF No. 91] at 6–7, this statement appears in a section of the Deposit Agreement qualified with the following

Havana Docks Corporation v. Carnival Corporation

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 13, 2021

Specifically, that party must establish each of its elements. … The burden, therefore, is clearly on Carnival here, to establish each element of the work product doctrine.

Gagliardi v. Social Security Administration

District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 28, 2020

“A clearly articulated credibility finding with substantial supporting evidence in the record will not be disturbed by a reviewing court.” Foote v. Chater, 67 F.3d 1553, 1562 (11th Cir. 1995). … ’ opinions, failed to justify the discounting of Plaintiff’s own testimony, and failed to establish that the SSA met its burden to prove Plaintiff is capable of maintain[ing] work.”

Tung v. Dycom Industries, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 14, 2020

The Court cannot proceed to a Section 20(a) violation if the plaintiff fails first to establish a Section 10(b) violation. See id. … • “We have established relationships with many leading telecommunications providers.”

Henderson v. Secretary, Department of Children & Families

District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 28, 2024

An “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law is different from an incorrect application of federal law. Id. at 409–10. … Even summary rejection of a claim qualifies as an adjudication on the merits that is entitled to deference under AEDPA. See Meders v. Warden, Ga. Diagnostic Prison, 911 F.3d 1335, 1351 (11th Cir. 2019).

GLD, LLC v. Gold Presidents LLC

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 15, 2021

Further, “the alleged infringement clearly also occurred in Florida by virtue of the website’s accessibility in Florida.” Id. Thus, Lovelady squarely governs this case. … Even if the side-by-side photo is enough to establish a likelihood of confusion, Plaintiff does not do enough to establish the other threshold elements of a prima facie Lanham Act trade dress infringement case, namely