Parfitt v. Florida Gulf Coast University Board of Trustees

M.D. Florida

Parfitt v. Florida Gulf Coast University Board of Trustees

DecidedMarch 23, 2020

Docket2:19-cv-00727

StatusUnknown

This text of Parfitt v. Florida Gulf Coast University Board of Trustees (Parfitt v. Florida Gulf Coast University Board of Trustees) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Parfitt v. Florida Gulf Coast University Board of Trustees, (M.D. Fla. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER PARFITT, individually

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 2:19-cv-727-FtM-38NPM

FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY, EUNSOOK HYUN, JAMES LLORENS and PRECIOUS GUNTER,

Defendants. / ORDER1 Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 59) and Plaintiff’s response in opposition (Doc. 62). In part, Defendants argue Count 2 must be dismissed based on sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment. (Doc. 59 at 11-12). Plaintiff responds mostly with the Ex parte Young doctrine, contending the Eleventh Amendment does not bar the claim. (Doc. 62 at 23-26 (citing Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908))). However, Defendants did not address that principle in their Motion. Because Eleventh Amendment immunity is a threshold, jurisdictional question not completely briefed, the Court requires additional briefing before proceeding. See Bouchard Transp. Co. v. Fla. Dep’t of Envtl. Prot., 91 F.3d 1445, 1448-49 (11th Cir. 1996).

1 Disclaimer: Documents hyperlinked to CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By using hyperlinks, the Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide, nor does it have any agreements with them. The Court is also not responsible for a hyperlink’s availability and functionality, and a failed hyperlink does not affect this Order. Thus, Defendants must file a supplemental brief on the matter, to which Plaintiff may respond. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. Defendants must FILE a supplemental brief, not to exceed five (5) pages, on the issue identified above on or before April 2, 2020. Then, Plaintiff may FILE a response to Defendants’ supplemental brief, not to exceed three (3) pages, on or before April 6, 2020. 2. The Court will DEFER RULING on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 59) until the time for all supplemental briefing passes. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 23rd day of March, 2020.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies: All Parties of Record

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER PARFITT, individually

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 2:19-cv-727-FtM-38NPM

FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY, EUNSOOK HYUN, JAMES LLORENS and PRECIOUS GUNTER,

Defendants. / ORDER1 Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 59) and Plaintiff’s response in opposition (Doc. 62). In part, Defendants argue Count 2 must be dismissed based on sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment. (Doc. 59 at 11-12). Plaintiff responds mostly with the Ex parte Young doctrine, contending the Eleventh Amendment does not bar the claim. (Doc. 62 at 23-26 (citing Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908))). However, Defendants did not address that principle in their Motion. Because Eleventh Amendment immunity is a threshold, jurisdictional question not completely briefed, the Court requires additional briefing before proceeding. See Bouchard Transp. Co. v. Fla. Dep’t of Envtl. Prot., 91 F.3d 1445, 1448-49 (11th Cir. 1996).

1 Disclaimer: Documents hyperlinked to CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By using hyperlinks, the Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide, nor does it have any agreements with them. The Court is also not responsible for a hyperlink’s availability and functionality, and a failed hyperlink does not affect this Order. Thus, Defendants must file a supplemental brief on the matter, to which Plaintiff may respond. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. Defendants must FILE a supplemental brief, not to exceed five (5) pages, on the issue identified above on or before April 2, 2020. Then, Plaintiff may FILE a response to Defendants’ supplemental brief, not to exceed three (3) pages, on or before April 6, 2020. 2. The Court will DEFER RULING on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 59) until the time for all supplemental briefing passes. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 23rd day of March, 2020.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies: All Parties of Record

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Parfitt v. Florida Gulf Coast University Board of Trustees, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parfitt-v-florida-gulf-coast-university-board-of-trustees-flmd-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack