Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersflsd

2,119 results

0.35s

  • Powers v. Government Employees Insurance

    192 F.R.D. 313 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 17, 1998

    It is undisputed that Plaintiffs attorney is qualified, experienced and will competently and vigorously prosecute the suit. … The foregoing analysis demonstrates that the threshold requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy are clearly satisfied by such a class.

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Miller v. Miami Prefabricators, Inc.

    438 F. Supp. 176 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 9, 1977

    Clearly this applies to new employment and is different from an employee who is seeking promotion. … Transworld Airlines, supra, concerned the violation inquiry, and established that the application of a bona fide seniority system cannot, under Evans , result in a present violation of Title VII because of a refusal to hire

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Scheinberg v. Smith

    550 F. Supp. 1112 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 4, 1982

    The testimony on proffer clearly shows that the two identified interests were not considered by the Florida Legislature prior to enactment of the Medical Practice Act. … Scheinberg, qualified as an expert witness, these approximate percentages reflect at least the Florida percentages in 1979, the time at which this statute was pássed. In fact, Dr.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Gainsburg v. The Florida Bar

    District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 13, 2024

    Pursuant to the “legal fiction established in Ex Parte Young,” Alabama v. … as true, indisputably establishes the factual foundation of the defense.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • 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].”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • South Florida Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County

    552 F. Supp. 909 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 16, 1982

    of qualified Black contractors, and whether it was feasible to establish a Black *920 prime contractor set-aside and Black subcontractor participation goals. … foster participation of qualified Black contractors and subcontractors in the contract work.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • United States v. Townsend

    519 F. Supp. 623 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 29, 1981

    In sum, under the circumstances of this case, the decisional law clearly indicates that the explosive at issue qualifies as a destructive device. B. … While no formal agreement nor direct evidence is necessary to establish a conspiracy, Hamling v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Banco De Desarrollo Agropecuario, S.A. v. Gibbs

    640 F. Supp. 1168 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 1, 1986

    Acts that are part of the same scheme or transaction can qualify as distinct predicate acts. … This falls short of establishing probable cause.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • DWFII Corp. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

    271 F.R.D. 676 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 10, 2010

    Rule 23(a) contains an implicit, threshold requirement that the proposed class be “adequately defined and clearly ascertainable.” See, e.g., Rink v. … Short, 433 F.2d 733, 734 (5th Cir.1970) (“It is elementary that in order to maintain a class action, the class sought to be represented must be adequately defined and clearly ascertainable.”)). 8 Rule 23(a) further contains

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Reyes v. BCA Fin. Servs., Inc.

    312 F. Supp. 3d 1308 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 14, 2018

    The petitioner argued that the FCC erred because "debt collectors use predictive dialers to call specific numbers provided by established customers." Id. at 566 . … be dialed, or can it so qualify even if it lacks that capacity?

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • BankAtlantic v. Coast to Coast Contractors, Inc.

    22 F. Supp. 2d 1354 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 13, 1998

    This association is clearly sufficient to qualify as an enterprise pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (4). … It is clear from these pleas that an agreement to defraud BankAtlantic has been established as a matter of law.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Hazel v. School Bd. of Dade County, Fla.

    7 F. Supp. 2d 1349 · District Court, S.D. Florida · May 8, 1998

    Hazel must allege facts which establish that she was “deprived of a job benefit which she was otherwise qualified to receive because of the employer’s use of a prohibited criterion in making the employment decision.” … ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State ..., subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Delvecchio v. Smith

    590 F. Supp. 2d 1378 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 29, 2008

    However, the Respondent has submitted documents to this Court that clearly support the Petitioners’ position on this claim. … Tax Court and the 2006 affirming Order by Eleventh Circuit, which clearly indicate that the November 13, 2001 assessments were valid.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • United States v. Livdahl

    459 F. Supp. 2d 1255 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Oct 17, 2005

    Defendant Karim also contends that TRI’s product does not qualify as a “biological product” under the FDCA. … As the Government points out, the Supreme Court has squarely held that the First Amendment “does not prohibit the evidentiary use of speech to establish the elements of a crime or to prove motive or intent.”

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Parker v. Cook

    464 F. Supp. 350 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 1, 1979

    Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 , 97 S.Ct. 285 , 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976) held that the elementary principles of the Eighth Amendment establish the government’s obligation to provide medical care for those whom it is punishing by incarceration … Moreover, State officials such as these possess a qualified immunity from damages, Procunier v. Navarette, 434 U.S. 555, 562 , 98 S.Ct. 855, 860 , 55 L.Ed.2d 24 (1978).

    Modified by Robert Parker v. A. F. Cook, Individually and in His Capacity as Superintendent of Glades Correctional Institute, 642 F.2d 865 (1981)Cited 1 timesPublished
  • News and Sun-Sentinel Co. v. Cox

    702 F. Supp. 891 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 19, 1988

    Clearly, the selling of newspapers constitutes a commercial activity. … The discussion, however, clearly involved Fla.Stat. sec. 337.406.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Allen v. United States

    187 F. Supp. 625 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 15, 1960

    Allen, at his own expense, visited numerous persons in prospective destination areas in order to establish this system. … Allen was clearly the common denominator, all organizational threads running to him.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Aarras v. Doral

    169 F. Supp. 3d 1337 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 15, 2016

    Whether a defendant is a plaintiffs employer is a question of law, and can be determinative because the FLSA’s protections do not apply in the absence of a qualifying employer-employee relationship. See Freeman v. … Providing such banquet and food and beverage services to guests of the TND for group functions held at the hotel would clearly be an integral part of the business.” (Resp.18).

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Siegel v. LePore

    120 F. Supp. 2d 1041 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 13, 2000

    Under our caselaw, “[a] preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy not to be granted unless the movant clearly established] the ‘burden of persuasion’ as to the four requisites.” Id. … In addition, "[a]ny candidate, qualified elector, or taxpayer presenting such a contest to a circuit judge is entitled to an immediate hearing”. Fla. Stat. § 102.168 (7).

    Cited 10 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.