Case law

Scruggs v. United States

959 F. Supp. 1537 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 20, 1997

and donated it to the FAA to upgrade the FAA’s capabilities; (3) established a communications base within the RCO structure; (4) installed a collision avoidance electronic system; or (5) established restricted areas which … However, there are certain exceptions to the limited waiver of sovereign immunity such as the “discretionary function exception.” 28 U.S.C. § 2680 (a). 110.

United States v. Noriega

752 F. Supp. 1045 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 6, 1990

In Nebraska Press, the Supreme Court established the demanding test that must be met before a prior restraint on pretrial publicity is justified. … North, 910 F.2d 843 (D.C.Cir.1990) (vacating defendant’s conviction on ground that district court did not sufficiently ensure that defendant’s immunized testimony was not used by the prosecution and its witnesses, either

Darlow v. The City of Coral Springs

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 12, 2022

Defendants further maintained that Babineck is entitled to qualified immunity and the City is immune from suit because the Complaint failed to demonstrate that the alleged violations resulted from a long-standing custom … As to Count I against Babineck, the Court found that although he spoke as a private citizen on a matter of public concern, the Court was compelled to defer its determination of qualified immunity under Pickering v.

Coastal Neurology, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

271 F.R.D. 538 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 30, 2010

Rule 23(a) contains an implicit, threshold requirement that the proposed class be “adequately defined and clearly ascertainable.” See, e.g., Rink v. … “This requirement involves an inquiry into whether the plaintiffs counsel is qualified, experienced, and generally able to conduct the litigation, and whether the plaintiff has interests antagonistic to those of the rest

Huggup v. Monroe County Detention Center

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 31, 2022

Nonetheless, courts may dismiss as frivolous claims that are “based on an indisputably meritless legal theory” or “whose factual contentions are clearly baseless.” Neitzke v. … Factual detail in the pleadings is particularly necessary in cases involving qualified immunity, where the Court must determine whether a defendant’s actions violated a clearly established right.

C.F.C. v. Miami-Dade Cnty.

349 F. Supp. 3d 1236 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 14, 2018

DHS may enter into a written agreement with a state or any political subdivision of a state, pursuant to which an officer or employee of the state or political subdivision, who is determined by the Secretary of DHS to be qualified … The Parties appear to agree that the Mayor's directive-while clearly the impetus for the County's policy reversal-did not have the force of law until ratified by the Board's resolution on February 17, 2017.

FORTUN v. IAERO THRUST LLC.

District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 14, 2022

Under the ADA, a plaintiff must establish the following three elements for a prima facie case: (1) the plaintiff “has a disability”; (2) the plaintiff is a “qualified individual”; and (3) the plaintiff was discriminated … Therefore, Fortun has properly alleged a qualifying need for leave.

Zen Group, Inc. v. State of Florida Agency for Health Care Administration

District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 28, 2021

claim, the Court need not address whether Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity or whether Count I is barred by sovereign immunity. … The Court disagrees. 4 Having found that Plaintiffs have not established a § 1983 claim for First Amendment violations, the Court need not address whether Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity or whether Count

Saint-Vil v. City of Miami Beach

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

Once an officer clears that threshold, he is entitled to qualified immunity under section 1983 “unless (1) [he] violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of [his] conduct was clearly … established at the time.”

Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance v. Yachtsman's Inn Condo Ass'n

595 F. Supp. 2d 1319 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 22, 2009

The Policy clearly provides insurance for liability arising from bodily injury subject to a number of exclusions to coverage (D.E. # 11). … Following a plain meaning interpretation of the Policy language, the Court finds that battery acid qualifies as an “acid” and “raw sewage and feces” is included in the definition of “waste” as “materials to recycled, reconditioned

Lamb Ex Rel. Donaldson v. Volkswagenwerk Aktienge-Sellschaft

631 F. Supp. 1144 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 25, 1986

The mere prospect that Plaintiff might recover damages from a defendant on a tort theory is clearly not tantamount to a vested right. … Consequently, Plaintiff does not qualify for nonretroactivity under the second factor in Chevron Oil .

Osorio v. State Farm Bank, F.S.B.

859 F. Supp. 2d 1326 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 10, 2012

A debt collector should be immune from liability under the TCPA when an applicant represents that a family member’s or close acquaintance’s phone number belongs to him. … The court held that because plaintiff authorized her provider to call her cell phone, her provider’s collection efforts were not governed by the TCPA because “as clearly stated in the December 28, 2007 FCC Declaratory Ruling

Wolf v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc.

101 F. Supp. 3d 1298 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 30, 2015

their relationship had been established. … Third parties do not need to be specifically named in the contract to qualify as intended beneficiaries, as “long as the contract refers to a well-defined class of readily identifiable persons that it intends to benefit.”

Eglise Baptiste Bethanie De Ft. Lauderdale, Inc. v. The Seminole Tribe of Florida

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 3, 2020

And the qualified nature of Indian sovereignty modifies that principle only by placing a tribe’s immunity, like its other governmental powers and attributes, in Congress’s hands. See United States v. U.S. … Moreover, it is well established that “Congress may abrogate a sovereign’s immunity only by using statutory language that makes its intention unmistakably clear, and [any] ambiguities in federal laws implicating Indian

Osahar v. Carlin

642 F. Supp. 448 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 30, 1986

“The burden of establishing a prima facie case of disparate treatment is not onerous. … Defendant’s argument that Article 33 of the pertinent labor agreement forced it to rely on the QRF to the exclusion of the MN-500 is clearly a pretext.

Richitelli v. United States Postal Service

District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 22, 2023

“The FTCA waives the United States’ sovereign immunity from suit in federal courts for its employees’ negligence.” Foster Logging, Inc. v. … On the other hand, Plaintiff, who lives very close to the Premises, see SMF ¶ 3 (undisputed), clearly testified that while she thought it was going to rain because it was dark outside, it had not rained, and she did not

Guirola v. Miami-Dade County

District Court, S.D. Florida · May 25, 2022

established Fourth Amendment protections against excessive force. … Sovereign immunity therefore attaches to the claims against Miami-Dade [County].”).

Anderson v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

506 F. Supp. 2d 1215 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 14, 2007

action; (3) his employer treated similarly situated employees of other races more favorably and (4) he was qualified to do the job. … Thus, to the extent Plaintiff contends Williamson is a comparator, he is clearly wrong.

Holywell Corp. v. Bank of New York (In Re Holywell Corp.)

177 B.R. 991 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 20, 1995

The Court concludes the Trustee is not liable to the debtors pursuant to the doctrine of derived judicial immunity. Final Judgment dated 9/30/93, p. 18. … As to Debtors’ counterclaim of conspiracy against Trustee, the Bankruptcy Court found that Debtors established no conspiracy between Trustee and the Bank.

Randolph v. United States Elevator Corp.

452 F. Supp. 1120 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 14, 1978

As in any Title VII action, Randolph must carry the initial burden of establishing the prima facie case and then if he does so, U.S. … There is ample evidence in the record to support the Court’s conclusion that Randolph established a prima facie case.