Case law

Miami Herald Media Co. v. Fla. Dep't of Transp.

345 F. Supp. 3d 1349 · District Court, N.D. Florida · Oct 5, 2018

One of the primary purposes of the removal statute-as its history clearly demonstrates-was to have such defenses litigated in the federal courts.... … The United States also asserts in its notice that (1) "[t]he NTSB is *1363 an independent establishment of the United States Government entitled to sovereign immunity"; (2) the NTSB "is an indispensable party that, under

Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General Re: Regulate Marijuana in a Manner Similar to Alcohol to Establish Age, Licensing, and Other Restrictions

Supreme Court of Florida · Jun 17, 2021

Does not affect compassionate use of low-THC cannabis, nor immunize federal law violations. … Here, we address only one of the issues raised by the opponents of the measure—an issue that is clearly dispositive.

MacIntyre v. City of Palm Bay

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 6, 2025

Accordingly, “[t]o survive a motion to dismiss based upon qualified immunity, the plaintiff must have alleged sufficient facts to support a finding of a constitutional violation of a clearly established law.” … “[A]n entitlement to qualified immunity ‘raised . . . on a motion to dismiss . . . will be granted if the complaint fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.’”

City of Gainesville v. STATE, DOT

778 So. 2d 519 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 5, 2001

City of Miami, 157 Fla. 726 , 27 So.2d 118, 125 (1946) ("It is City Council's duty to decide upon the rate, and we cannot set it aside unless it is clearly inequitable."). … In our view, the General Assembly has by the adoption of sections 31-35-401(1) and 402(1)(f) clearly expressed its intent to subject the State Community Colleges Board to the fees charged by the City. [7] Sovereign immunity

King

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 4, 2026

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Pearson v. … King has not shown that Brett’s conduct violated clearly established law. “[T]he touchstone of qualified immunity is notice.”

Fleming Companies, Inc. v. Moreira

690 So. 2d 1367 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 2, 1997

The court also established that where the association between the employee and the special employer is in doubt, the actual employment relationship, and not the subjective intent of the parties, is controlling. … Here, Regency is in the business of supplying temporary help and provided workers' compensation coverage, thereby clearly falling under the terminology of Section 440.11(2). See Sagarino v.

Jones v. Florida Power Corp.

72 So. 2d 285 · Supreme Court of Florida · Apr 6, 1954

The lower court, in ruling on this motion in defendants' favor, said: "Upon the admitted facts and law hereinbefore set forth or referred to, it appears clearly to the undersigned Circuit Judge that Florida Power Corporation … His immunity from suit is commensurate with his liability for securing compensation — no more and no less.

Militello v. Bardell

970 F. Supp. 1022 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 10, 1997

Even if Defendant Mike Barr should remain as a defendant in this action, he is still entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 1543 . … Accordingly, the Court finds Defendant Mike Barr is entitled to qualified immunity. II.

Barnett v. Department of Management Servs.

931 So. 2d 121 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 22, 2006

Any lingering uncertainty as to the legislative intent behind the creation of the Act was, in our opinion, clearly dispelled by the legislature's addition of subsection (8) to section 957.04 in 1999, which provides that the … Contrary to appellant's position, we conclude the quoted provision should be viewed merely as an indicator of legislative intent that, in making the cost-saving determination to qualify for a contract to operate a prison

Clark v. Bell

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 19, 2025

“Clearly Established” Unlawfulness To defeat a claim of qualified immunity, Plaintiff must establish both that there was a violation of his constitutional rights and that the unlawfulness … of Defendant’s conduct was “clearly established” at the time of the arrest.

Big Sun Healthcare Systems, Inc. v. Prescott

582 So. 2d 756 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 11, 1991

Facts are not necessarily privileged simply because they are recorded on a privileged or immune document. … (f) The department or its agent, for the purpose of establishing and maintaining a trauma registry... .

Tractor Supply Co. v. Kent

966 So. 2d 978 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 31, 2007

The question presented in this appeal is whether Byerley and Elliott establish that an employer such as TSC, who, through its comp carrier, [2] denies a worker's compensation claim on the basis that the injury or illness … assert comp immunity as a defense to a civil suit.

FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES v. REBECCA ALEXANDRE, etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 17, 2023

of the state to enter into contract or to undertake those activities 5  which, as a matter of practicality, require entering into contract, the legislature has clearly … Id. at 6; see also Verdini, 339 So. 3d at 418 (“It is firmly established that a sovereign may be sued in contract only where there is an express, written contract.”); County of Brevard v.

Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Thompson Aircraft Tire Corp.

353 So. 2d 137 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 22, 1977

At the hearing on this motion, Firestone made an oral motion for leave to amend its complaint to state more clearly its contention that, although it was not negligent, if any negligence were to be found on its part, such … (Supp. 1976). [5] We note that Armor is clearly distinguishable from the instant case in that the third party plaintiff therein made no attempt to amend his complaint, but instead predicated his claim for indemnity on the

Wright v. Jones

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 28, 2025

With respect to the pleading stage, “[g]enerally speaking, it is proper to grant a motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds when the ‘complaint fails to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional … qualified immunity is inappropriate.

Department Hrs v. Bjm

656 So. 2d 906 · Supreme Court of Florida · Apr 27, 1995

If the questions posed in Evangelical can be clearly and unequivocally answered yes, then the challenged act is probably policy-making, planning, or judgmental activity which is immune from tort liability. … However, it is undisputed that HRS was providing services to B.J.M. pursuant to a permanent placement plan established by court order.

Randolph v. Beer

695 So. 2d 401 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 9, 1997

The trial court granted the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the ground that it had erred in failing to instruct the jury that Beer and CFEFCU were entitled to the protection of qualified immunity as a matter … Once a defendant has demonstrated that the defamatory statement is protected by a qualified privilege, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish that the privilege was lost through malice or improper purpose.

Lavette v. State

442 So. 2d 265 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 16, 1983

immunity in time for a useful deposition to have been taken. … One of the conditions outlined in Smith for requiring a grant of immunity is that the proffered testimony is clearly exculpatory.

UCF Athletics Ass'n v. Plancher

121 So. 3d 1097 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 16, 2013

Since a reasonable reader could believe that the liability waiver only extended to claims for injuries that were unavoidable “even when every reasonable precaution” had been taken, the court determined the waiver did not clearly … Eminisor, 104 So.3d 359, 368 (Fla.2012) (“The State acts through its agencies and independent establishments, and a corporate instrumentality of an agency or independent establishment is an instrumentality of the state.”)

County of Brevard v. Miorelli Engineering, Inc.

677 So. 2d 32 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 28, 1996

contract, it clearly intends that such contracts be valid and binding on both parties. … The fourth district noted that the supreme court in Pan-Am did not indicate that it intended to change established principles of contract law.