Case law

Brooks, III v. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 31, 2021

violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 1 On January 7, 2021, this Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint, ECF No. [20], and ordered Plaintiff to amend his Complaint to clearly … In his Response, Plaintiff contends that temporal proximity to establish causation is sufficiently alleged because the Amended Complaint states that: (1) Mr.

TAILLARD v. MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 3, 2025

Florida law and finding that a breach of express warranty claim could be brought under the MMWA despite a lack of privity and stating that “[c]ourts have relaxed the privity requirement where the express warranty was clearly … “Thus, an agency relationship establishing vicarious liability for fraud generally does not have to be pleaded with particularity.” Id.

Tunon-Padron v. Riggins

District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 29, 2019

Under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), courts may dismiss as frivolous claims that are “based on an indisputably meritless legal theory” or “whose factual contentions are clearly baseless” Neitzke v. … “Personal participation...is only one of several ways to establish the requisite causal connection, Zatler v.

Silas v. Dixon

District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 10, 2023

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 … A state court’s decision qualifies as “an unreasonable application of federal law if the state court identifies the correct governing legal principle from the Supreme Court’s decisions but unreasonably applies that principle

Security National Insurance Company v. The City of Miami Beach, Florida

District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 28, 2022

The City, responding jointly to both motions, argues that its crossclaims are procedurally proper and legally cognizable, and that A&A cannot establish good cause to set aside its default because A&A’s default was willful … Armiger clearly states that a breach of a nondelegable duty is “direct” negligence. Id. at 875. A premises owner’s “liability for the breach of a nondelegable duty arises from direct—instead of imputed—liability.”

Longino v. Martinez

District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 11, 2022

Kim, two officials employed by the State of Florida, deprived him of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or federal law, the Court agrees with Defendants that Plaintiff’s claims can be analyzed … As the Supreme Court has clearly explained, the proper recourse for the aggrieved client of a public defender is to either assert a claim of malpractice “in an appropriate case under state tort law” or challenge his

Gonzalez v. The Independent Order of Foresters

District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 8, 2024

Plaintiff further asserts that after qualifying for an accelerated death benefit under the Policies based on a diagnosis of a chronic illness, he was offered a payment that was incongruent with the representations that … In his deposition testimony, Plaintiff stated that he pressed the Independent Producer for an explanation why she stated he would receive 90% of the face value of Policy 1 when the Rider clearly indicated the potential

Moore v. University of Miami Hospital

District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 21, 2025

Sept. 5, 2024) (“We’ve often emphasized that the analysis established in McDonnell Douglas is ‘an evidentiary tool,’ not an independent standard of liability, and certainly not a pleading standard.” … Reporting alleged discrimination or wrongful treatment toward customers — or in this case, patients — does not qualify as protected activity under Title VII. See id.

Shevland v. Orlando

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 19, 2022

Clearly, this is the sort of activity in which FINRA maintains a regulatory interest. … But they are clearly inapposite.

Moye v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 24, 2020

One visit does not qualify Dr. Shaikh as a treating source. … Plaintiff has failed to establish that she met or equaled the specific requirements of Listing 4.04.

Bernal v. All American Investment Realty, Inc.

479 F. Supp. 2d 1291 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 23, 2007

When asked by the Court to explain why he did not provide a qualified answer to the request for admissions as required by Rule 36 instead of the misleading outright denial, Mr. … Kleppin clearly wanted to take Khan’s deposition, and noticed that deposition for January, 2006, although he did so without knowing if Khan would cooperate.

Benavides v. Tesla, Inc

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

Therefore, the Florida Legislature has clearly delineated the substantive and procedural components of the statute. … Draeleaus, 226 So. 3d 990, 994 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (explaining that the statute provides “immunity” to individuals involved in an accident under certain circumstances); Sottilaro v.

Jacobs v. Mid-Continent Casualty Company

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 8, 2021

One more thing: Florida law is clear that the burden of establishing this allocation (as between covered and uncovered claims) falls on the plaintiff—and that the plaintiff’s failure to allocate entitles the insurer in … It argues, mainly, that Vesta and Zekofsky qualified as Mr. Jacobs’s “statutory employer” under Florida law, and that coverage for Mr.

SRAM, LLC v. Princeton Carbon Works Inc.

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 13, 2023

Stated differently, a person of ordinary skill in the art would clearly understand that there is no convex region for the attachment of spokes.” Id. at 36–37. Drs. … —and given the sharply disputed factual record in this case, which includes the detailed opinions of opposing (and qualified) experts—we DENY SRAM’s MSJ as to this aspect of (1) Princeton’s Third Affirmative Defense and

Michaels v. Sassers Glass Works Inc.

District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 20, 2023

But, repugnant though they may be, both comments “clearly fall[ ] short of the type of evidence that this Circuit has recognized as direct evidence of discrimination.” Carter v. … First, Michaels cites no law for his view that his refusal to fight Johnson qualifies as protected activity under § 1981.

Collado v. 450 North River Drive, LLC

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

“Class representatives bear the burden to establish that their proposed class is ‘adequately defined and clearly ascertainable,’ and they must satisfy this requirement before the district court can consider whether the … Jan. 22, 2013) (citing 29 U.S.C. § 203(m)).7 To qualify for a “tip credit” exemption, “the employer must establish that (1) the tip credit is claimed for qualified tipped employees; (2) the

In re Horizon Organic Milk Plus Dha Omega-3 Marketing & Sales Practice Litigation

955 F. Supp. 2d 1311 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 24, 2013

[C]linical cause and effect studies establish that WFC’s brain health representation is false and deceptive. … “A plaintiff must: (1) establish a loss or deprivation of money or property sufficient to qualify as injury in fact, i.e., economic injury, and (2) show that that economic injury was the result of, i.e., caused by, the unfair

Buckley v. Moore

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 26, 2021

In several cases, courts have held that the words “other medium” in section 770.01 are expansive enough to include blogs—and that a blog will qualify as a “media defendant” for purposes of the pre-suit notice requirement … At this stage, these allegations are sufficient to establish a relationship to Florida for purposes of asserting a FDUTPA claim. See Romantic Tours, Inc. v.

Mountain View Productions, LLC v. BG Big Boat Ltd.

District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 16, 2026

Although the record indicates that these supposed agents were within the district, none of these avenues for service clearly indicate that, at the time of attachment, service on these parties would bind Defendant. … La. 2020) (discussing and distinguishing Neset to hold that “Captain Bona does not qualify as a managing agent of Eastern Pacific”).

Bettis v. TOYS" R" US

646 F. Supp. 2d 1273 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 5, 2009

That FOIA request is not a legitimate attempt to understand the case assignment system, and it does not qualify as a serious probe of the truth. What it does is reveal Mr. … Bettis has established no bias— or even an appearance of bias.