Case law

Seals v. United States

714 F. Supp. 1194 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 7, 1989

As a sovereign, the United States is immune to suit unless it waives its immunity. Thomas v. Calavar Corporation, 679 F.2d 416, 418 (5th Cir.1982). … FTCA has established “a limited waiver of sovereign immunity, making the federal government liable to the same extent as a private party for certain torts of federal employees acting within the scope of their employment.”

Rinker v. Carnival Corp.

836 F. Supp. 2d 1309 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 22, 2011

As to the remaining claims, Carnival argues that Plaintiff cannot establish that Carnival breached any duty to her and, even if it did, Plaintiff cannot establish causation. 1. … Negligent Hiring, Negligence Based on Carnival’s Failure to Notify Passengers that the Ship’s Doctors and Nurses Were Not Properly Qualified, and Negligent Reliance on the Medical Opinions of an Improperly Qualified Ship’

United States v. Menotte

484 B.R. 835 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 19, 2012

The Bankruptcy Court further determined that the IRS did not qualify for a defense by acting as a “mere conduit.” … Thus, the Trustee has not established that the Bankruptcy Court erred as a matter of law.

Florida Carry, Inc. v. City of Miami Beach

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 30, 2021

2) that those rights were clearly established at the time the officer acted.” … Defendant Officers are entitled to qualified immunity as to these claims because Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that their conduct violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

Burrow v. Forjas Taurus S.A. & Braztech Int'l, L.C.

334 F. Supp. 3d 1222 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 10, 2018

But, as the proponent of the privilege, Defendants failed to carry their burden of establishing that it applies to these items. … This is not the law because an attorney's tangential involvement would effectively immunize all documents relating to internal investigations. See id.

Root v. Menz

District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 21, 2022

(ECF No. 19) based on judicial immunity, quasi-judicial immunity, and for failure to state a claim. Mot. at 4. Plaintiff filed his Response, (ECF No. 21), and Defendants filed a Reply (ECF No. 19). … The burden of proof has always been upon the defendants to establish an exemption from its legal duties under the ADA.” Objs. at 3.

Miami-Dade County v. United States

345 F. Supp. 2d 1319 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 30, 2004

The County, as Plaintiff, bears the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction and must show Counts VIII, IX, and X fall within the scope of an explicit waiver of sovereign immunity. See Lundeen v. … In all, the evidence fails to establish the designation of MIA as a FUDS site confers control of MIA to the United States sufficient to trigger RCRA’s waiver of sovereign immunity.

Berner v. Carnival Corp.

632 F. Supp. 2d 1208 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 2, 2009

While [the biomechanical engineer] was qualified to give general opinions about causation, he was not qualified to give medical opinions. … To be sure, Carnival concedes these conclusions “clearly fall within her area of expertise.” (Def.’s Reply at 7). Dr.

Cobb Coin Co. v. Unidentified, Wrecked & Abandoned Sailing Vessel

525 F. Supp. 186 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 2, 1981

In other words, where a suit is one which would be barred by sovereign immunity — that is, a suit for past money damages, see Section II.B. infra — a statute which purportedly waives that immunity will be strictly construed … Clearly, the movant will be irreparably harmed if the injunction does not issue. C.

Barcelona v. Secretary of D.O.C.

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 10, 2019

To be entitled to qualified immunity, an officer must establish that he was acting within his discretionary authority during the incident. Manners, 891 F.3d at 967. … The Defendants, in their individual capacities, are protected by qualified immunity because the alleged unconstitutionality of their conduct was not clearly established at the time of the events giving rise to this suit

Wyner v. Struhs

254 F. Supp. 2d 1297 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 27, 2003

Wyner instituted a civil rights violation suit and was awarded damages, but that result was later overturned on appeal on the basis that park officials were entitled to qualified immunity. See DeWald v. … “[A] preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy not to be granted unless the movant clearly established the ‘burden of persuasion’ as to each of the four prerequisites.”

Massaro v. Mainlands Section 1 & 2 Civic Ass'n

796 F. Supp. 1499 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 8, 1992

A factual determination that the Mainlands qualifies, or does not qualify, under 42 U.S.C. § 3607 (b)(2)(C) as housing for older persons, will therefore be determinative of this case. … This was clearly in excess of the two-thirds requirement, and was therefore valid.

Isenbergh v. Knight-Ridder Newspaper Sales, Inc.

856 F. Supp. 1561 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 22, 1994

As indicated above, even if it were determined that Isenbergh were qualified 14 , and thus his prima facie case is achieved, the defendant’s motion would be granted because Isenbergh clearly failed to demonstrate the defendant … Clearly Isenbergh was qualified for a position as a sales person. His qualifications as a manager were more dubious.

DFDS Seacruises (Bahamas) Ltd. v. United States

676 F. Supp. 1193 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 21, 1987

of the Ports to establish a firefighting contingency plan. … The testimony clearly demonstrated that the crew failed to turn off the ship’s air conditioning system in the car deck, allowing the introduction of fresh air until the Coast Guard secured the system.

O'Boyle v. Bradshaw

952 F. Supp. 2d 1310 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 1, 2013

CMI deprived Plaintiff of her rights, privileges and/or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida and the United States. … Bradshaw, 573 F.3d 1158, 1167 (11th Cir. 2009) (“Qualified immunity [ ] protects officers who reasonably but mistakenly conclude that probable cause is present.” (internal quotations omitted)).

Rocky v. Columbia Lawnwood Regional Medical Center

54 F. Supp. 2d 1159 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 2, 1999

Therefore, the Plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of associational disability discrimination by establishing each of the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) that the Plaintiff was qualified … As to the first element, the Court finds that the Plaintiff has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that she was qualified for her position at the time of the adverse employment action.

Dzikowski v. Blais (In Re Blais)

220 B.R. 485 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 21, 1997

The bankruptcy court looked behind the favorable determination letter and found facts sufficient to establish that the plan was no longer qualified under IRC § 401(a). The district court affirmed. … Clearly, the I.R.S. determination letter does not inquire into the operation of the Profit Sharing Plan and, in fact, limits its own applicability in that regard.

Hargett v. Florida Atlantic University Board of Trustees

219 F. Supp. 3d 1227 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 8, 2016

To establish a prima facie case under either the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act, a plaintiff must show that (1) she has a disability; (2) she is a “qualified individual,” in that she is “able to perform the essential functions … Although “specific stres-sors ... may in some eases be legitimate targets of accommodation,” an employee cannot immunize herself from stress and criticism in general. Gonzagowski v.

Dulcio v. Environmental Protection Agency

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

It is therefore appropriate for a district court to grant a motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds if the complaint “fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.” Corbitt v. … established’ for qualified immunity purposes in three ways: (1) pointing to a ‘materially similar case’ decided by the Supreme Court, the Eleventh Circuit, or the Florida Supreme Court that clearly establishes

Jasinski v. City of Miami

269 F. Supp. 2d 1341 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 11, 2003

-for the purpose of qualifying and selecting eligible firms/sole proprietors to provide towing and wrecker services for the Departments of Police and Fire-Rescue....” … R-130-99 established the maximum Administrative Fee at $30.00 per vehicle, and the City’s RFQ 98-99-171 established the maximum Administrative Charge at $25.00 for non-consent tows of privately owned vehicles.