Case law

Danny Williams v. Billy Brown

347 F. App'x 429 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 10, 2009

in retaliation for filing grievances violates his clearly established First Amendment rights.” … When assessing qualified immunity cases, we consider whether a constitutional right has been violated and whether the right was clearly established by the law at the time of the violation. Saucier v.

Michael Stevens Owens v. Asa D. Kelley, Jr., Etc.

681 F.2d 1362 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 5, 1982

Owens maintains that the program is pervaded with Biblical teachings such that it violates both the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses of the First Amendment. … are the immunity claims of Dougherty County and Judge Asa Kelley.

Sandra Gray v. The City of Roswell

486 F. App'x 798 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 13, 2012

clearly established constitutional or federal law of which a reasonable person would have known. … whether a reasonable public official could have believed that the questioned conduct was lawful under clearly established law.”

Tommy L. Mosley, Jr. v. Lt. Towanda Zachery

966 F.3d 1265 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 24, 2020

immunity. … was subjectively aware of a substantial risk of serious harm (the subjective prong of the deliberate- indifference standard); and whether she was entitled to qualified immunity.

Maddox v. Claytor

764 F.2d 1539 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 12, 1985

Establishment of the prima facie case triggers a rebuttable presumption of discrimination. … This finding is not clearly erroneous. Anderson, supra.

U.S. Federal Credit Union v. Gateway Radiology Consultants, P.A.

983 F.3d 1239 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 22, 2020

Because we hold for the SBA on the merits, we need not and do not reach the sovereign immunity issue. Cf. Silberman v. … Miami Dade Transit, 927 F.3d 1123, 1137 (11th Cir. 2019) (“Because sovereign immunity can be waived, our precedent allows us to ‘bypass’ the threshold question whether an entity is entitled to sovereign immunity where it

Frank Douglas v. United States

814 F.3d 1268 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 29, 2016

put: “Sovereign immunity is jurisdictional in nature.” … On the one hand, the core principles of a limited federal judiciary and respect for sovereign entities’ immunity from uneon-sented-to suits clearly cut against proceeding when jurisdiction remains uncertain.

Christopher Wheat v. Officer J. Day

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 2, 2021

Day moved for summary judgment, claiming entitlement to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

George Hoey Morris v. Daniel Dean

223 F. App'x 937 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 7, 2007

“Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … violation occurred and (2) that the constitutional right was clearly established.

Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc. v. Hillsborough County, Florida, and Hillsborough County Health Department

722 F.2d 1526 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 16, 1984

Ordinance 80-12 authorizes the Department to inspect TPC periodically, even though the Department apparently employs no qualified inspector. The regulations provide that such inspections shall occur at least annually. … The regulations clearly express a federal interest in establishing a uniform “National Blood Policy.” Cf. Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v.

Tony A. Wilson v. Lucy Farley

203 F. App'x 239 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2006

The court also found, concerning the DCF’s claim of qualified immunity for the individual defendants, that a qualified immunity inquiry was not necessary because Wilson had not established a violation of any constitutional … Qualified Immunity Wilson argues that the district court erred in finding that the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity.

United States v. Miguel Orduno-Mireles

405 F.3d 960 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 6, 2005

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) because the crimes do not qualify as “crimes of violence.” … Your criminal history speaks more clearly on actions than mere words.”

Taquila Monroe v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 15, 2024

Airlines Co., 385 F.3d 1324, 1330 (11th Cir. 2004) (“Any issue that an appellant wants the Court to address should be specifically and clearly identified in the brief. . … And participation in the Head Start programs is entirely consistent with the Board’s core state duties, which include “establish[ing] all such schools of learning or art as may be useful to the state

First Alabama Bank, N.A. v. United States

981 F.2d 1226 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 27, 1993

After careful consideration of all the circumstances of this case, we cannot conclude that these findings of fact are clearly erroneous. … The IRS operating procedures contained in the IRM do not delineate substantive rights of individuals but instead simply establish intra-agency operating procedures.

Jose Daniel Ruiz Coronado v. Bankatlantic Bancorp

222 F.3d 1315 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 18, 2000

On appeal, this court reversed and remanded because the allegations in Coronado's complaint, taken in the light most favorable to Coronado, did not establish grounds for BankAtlantic's immunity. … This immunity is very broad.2 As we recently reiterated in Lopez, "the adjective 'any' is not ambiguous; it has a well-established meaning" and, "[r]ead naturally, ... has an expansive meaning, that is, one or some indiscriminately

Heather Santiago v. Shawn Swain

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 18, 2025

“Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate a constitutional right that was clearly es- tablished at the time of the challenged … “[T]o establish the defense of qualified immunity for a false arrest claim, we have held that an officer need not have actual prob- able cause, but only arguable probable cause.”

Karyn D. Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida

83 F.4th 1333 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 11, 2023

“For a Supreme Court deci- sion to undermine panel precedent to the point of abrogation, the decision must be clearly on point and clearly contrary to the panel precedent.” Edwards v. U.S. … Neither court established that the text of Title I’s anti-discrimination provi- sion is ambiguous.

Linda Randol and Bruce Randol, Jr. v. Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of Tennessee

987 F.2d 1547 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 12, 1993

. § 1002 (1) statutory definition of an ERISA employee welfare benefit plan, establishing criteria for determining whether a given program qualifies as an ERISA plan. 3 Interpreting § 1002(1), the Eleventh Circuit has stated … As the instant insurance program clearly falls both outside of the scope of the safe harbor exception and within the case law definition of an ERISA welfare plan, the program qualifies as an ERISA plan regardless of whether

Phillips v. City of Dawsonville

499 F.3d 1239 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 11, 2007

For a public employee to sustain a retaliation claim for speech protected under the First Amendment, the employee must establish, among other things, that the employee spoke as a citizen on a matter of public concern. … Qualified immunity would protect the individual defendants if they were otherwise liable. 9

William A. Holbrook v. City of Alpharetta, Georgia

112 F.3d 1522 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 22, 1997

In order to establish a prima facie ease of discrimination in violation of the ADA, the plaintiff must prove that (1) he has a disability; (2) he is a qualified individual; and (3) he was subjected to unlawful discrimination … The Supreme Court has held that a plaintiff alleging a violation of a federal statute will be permitted to sue under section 1983 unless “ ‘(1) the statute does not create enforceable rights, privileges, or immunities within