Case law

Osmose, Inc. v. VIANCE, LLC

612 F.3d 1298 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 30, 2010

Thus, the district court did not clearly err in classifying these statements as “establishment” claims. … District Court’s Reliance on Qualifying Language in the Test Reports Lastly, Viance attacks the district court’s reliance on qualifying language in the Timber Products Reports and Dr.

Lee Andrew Jackson v. Glynn County Georgia

683 F. App'x 867 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2017

Bennett was entitled to qualified immunity unless Jackson proved that Bennett’s conduct violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established when the alleged violation occurred. See Gilmore v. … Bennett’s conduct “was not constitutionally inadequate for purposes of qualified immunity.” Id. The district court also did not err by entering summary judgment in favor of Davies based on qualified immunity.

United States v. 1461 West 42nd Street, Hialeah

251 F.3d 1329 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 22, 2001

Applying Good to the facts here, we find that the government did not provide claimants with a notice and hearing prior to seizing the Properties nor did it allege or establish the existence of exigent circumstances.4 … $637,944.57, 746 F.Supp. 1441, 1446 (D.Haw.1990) ("Clearly, Congress enacted 28 U.S.C. § 2465 for the important purpose of preventing the 'chilling effect' that liability for improvident seizures based on reasonable cause

Lajuan Rayshard Kinnemore v. Thomas Cochran

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 17, 2021

The detective as- serted the defense of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials who are acting within their discretionary authority from liability when their conduct does not violate a federal statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established

Amanda Cruz v. Joshua Davidson

552 F. App'x 865 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 31, 2013

To avoid dismissal on qualified immunity grounds, the plaintiff’s allegations must demonstrate both (1) a constitutional violation and (2) that the violation was clearly established. Id. … The denial of qualified immunity therefore is REVERSED. 9

United States v. 1461 W. 42nd St.

251 F.3d 1329 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 22, 2001

Applying Good to the facts here, we find that the government did not provide claimants with a notice and hearing prior to seizing the Properties nor did it allege or establish the existence of exigent circumstances.4 … Haw. 1990) (“Clearly, Congress enacted 28 U.S.C. § 2465 for the important purpose of preventing the ‘chilling effect’ that liability for improvident seizures based on reasonable cause might have on the government.”); United

Alan Rodemaker v. City of Valdosta Board of Education

110 F.4th 1318 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 5, 2024

The district court denied the individual Board members’ motions to dismiss on qual- ified immunity grounds, but we reversed that denial after conclud- ing that Rodemaker had failed to state a claim … Procedural History of Rodemaker I All five defendants filed motions to dismiss, contending that they were entitled to qualified immunity.

F.E.B. Corp. v. United States

818 F.3d 681 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 28, 2016

In that case, the Supreme Court established a rebuttable presumption that equitable tolling applies to statutes of limitation for suits against the federal government unless (1) Congress has “clearly stated” that a time limit … It is well-established—and was well-established when the SLA was enacted—that grants of federal property are construed strictly in favor of the United States. See Alaska, 521 U.S. at 34-35; United States v. Union Pac.

Cunningham v. Adams

808 F.2d 815 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 26, 1987

A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy which should only be granted *819 if the moving party clearly establishes: (1) a substantial likelihood that he will ultimately prevail on the merits; (2) a showing that … The transcript from the meeting clearly indicates that the Board viewed the candidates as very closely qualified.

Karen Fuerst v. The Housing Authority of the City of Atlanta, Georgia

38 F.4th 860 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 2022

To qualify for LIHTCs, builders must own a qualifying “low-income building” by the end of the first year in which they claim the credits. 26 U.S.C. § 42(g)(3)(a). … Although, as noted by the district court, reporting an actual rule violation could establish a reasonable belief under § 4712(a)(1), the statutory language clearly does not require Fuerst, or any plaintiff, to prove that

Stephanie Poiroux Snow v. City of Citronelle, AL

420 F.3d 1262 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 16, 2005

The district court granted summary judgment to all defendants in their individual capacities on the grounds of qualified immunity. … The district court found that the defendants did not violate Poiroux’s constitutional rights, and, in the alternative, if her rights were violated, the law was not clearly established.

Shangia Washington v. Warden

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 8, 2021

After careful review, we affirm on alternative grounds—because the law underlying the alleged constitutional violations was not clearly established, the officials are entitled to qualified immunity. … not entitled to qualified immunity.

Gary Wayne Grimes v. Steven Yoos

298 F. App'x 916 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 3, 2008

Also, because Yoos’s actions did not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right, of which a reasonable person would be aware, he was entitled to qualified immunity for his use of force. … Thus, because they did not violate a clearly established constitutional right in using canine force to apprehend Grimes, the defendants are protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity.

DeKalb County School District v. Schrenko

109 F.3d 680 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 7, 1997

black schools and to establish a neighborhood school attendance policy. The court retained jurisdiction to ensure compliance with its order. See Pitts v. Cherry, C.A. No. 11946 (N.D.Ga. … For that reason, absent its consent, a state may not be sued in federal court unless Congress has clearly and unequivocally abrogated the state's Eleventh Amendment immunity by exercising its power with respect to rights

United States v. Jose Hernandez-Gonzalez

318 F.3d 1299 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 27, 2003

The government further argued that the guidelines clearly warranted the 16-level enhancement under the circumstances. … He argues that his conviction qualifies as an “aggravated felony” pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) and only merits an 8-level enhancement.

Arline v. School Board

772 F.2d 759 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 30, 1985

Section 504 by its existence establishes that such a duty cannot be used to shield an entity from liability for making decisions which “arbitrarily deprive genuinely qualified handicapped persons of the opportunity to participate … We would be acting beyond our authority to read into section 504 limitations which Congress chose not to establish when it clearly could have done so. .

Danny M. Bennett v. Dennis Lee Hendrix

325 F. App'x 727 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2009

Turning to the second prong of the qualified immunity inquiry, we held the law was clearly established so as to put the defendants on notice, stating “it is ‘settled law* that the government may not retaliate against citizens … immunity on summary judgment, which, according to Bennett and Reid, established the law of the case with respect to the qualified immunity issue.

Ewing & Thomas P.A. v. Heye

803 F.2d 613 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 30, 1986

The district judge denied the award because he found that the taxpayer had failed to establish that “the position of the United States in the civil proceeding was unreasonable.” 26 U.S.C. § 7430 (c)(2)(A)®, 618 F.Supp. 648 … An amendment to a statute is clearly a legislative, not a judicial function. We cannot now do what Congress may have wanted to accomplish but has left undone. The First Circuit has made this very mistake in Kaufman v.

Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. South Florida Water Management District

559 F.3d 1191 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 24, 2009

Examples of “important issues” significant enough to justify immediate appellate jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine include denials of the defenses of absolute presidential immunity, qualified immunity, Eleventh … Amendment immunity, and double jeopardy.

Billy L. Faile, Jr. v. Linna Hart

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 14, 2024

Whether Plaintiff’s allegations establish the violation of a clearly constitutional right and whether the right was “clearly established” at the time of his arrest are issues of law. … Qualified Immunity Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity from Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claims asserted against them in their individual capacities under § 1983.