Case law

United States v. Terrence Javon Floyd

281 F.3d 1346 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 13, 2002

Floyd first contends that Miller was not qualified to testify as an interstate nexus expert. … The law in this circuit, however, clearly allows the interstate nexus element of § 922(g) to be established by expert testimony. See United States v.

Traci Moultrie v. Georgia Department of Corrections

703 F. App'x 900 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 10, 2017

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects government officials . . . . [unless] an official’s conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights . . . .” Rioux v. … against Moultrie violated clearly established law.”

TOT Property Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

1 F.4th 1354 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 23, 2021

Whether The Treasury Regulation Override Establishes the Deed’s Compliance with the Regulations for a Deduction for a Qualified Conservation Contribution The dispositive question for whether the taxpayer … A “qualified conservation contribution” is “a contribution . . . (A) of a qualified real property interest, (B) to a qualified organization, (C) exclusively for conservation purposes.”

Increase Minority Participation by Affirmative Change Today of Northwest Florida, Inc. v. Firestone

893 F.2d 1189 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 6, 1990

His testimony, if it had been accepted by the trial court, was clearly sufficient to establish a statistical disparity between the employment actions taken in favor of black applicants as against those taken in favor of whites … To accomplish this, the defendant must clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, the reasons for the plaintiffs rejection.

Michael Anderson v. City of Naples

501 F. App'x 910 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 17, 2012

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary duties from suits in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional … To overcome an official’s claim of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must show that: (1) the official violated a constitutional right; and (2) that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Richard Moss v. City of Pembroke Pines

782 F.3d 613 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2015

The district court dismissed Plaintiff’s claim against the Board as duplicative of his claim against the City, and dismissed his claim against Picarello on the ground of qualified immunity. … Thus, Plaintiff’s speech at the pension board and staff meeting clearly does not qualify for First Amendment protection under Garcetti.

Fikes v. City of Daphne

79 F.3d 1079 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 9, 1996

The court held, however, that even assuming the presence of a cognizable federal claim, the defendants, who were sued in their individual as opposed to their official capacities, were entitled to qualified immunity. … Therefore, Fikes has alleged sufficient facts to establish that he engaged in speech on a matter of public concern.

United States of America, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee v. Park B. Banks, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellant

115 F.3d 916 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 24, 1997

clearly imposing it,” E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. … Jurisdictional Wetlands Banks also disputes that his lots qualify as jurisdictional wetlands.

Owens v. Jackson County Board of Education

561 F. App'x 846 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2014

In addition, Harding asserted an affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … Defendants are entitled to summary judgment based on their qualified immunity only if “the law preexisting the defendant official’s supposedly wrongful act was already established to such a high degree that every objectively

Tyrone Anthony Kemp v. Kevin Pogorzelski

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 13, 2025

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Qualified immunity protects government officials perform- ing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … established.”

United States v. Santiago

601 F.3d 1241 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 2, 2010

Santiago concedes that his 2005 and 2006 convictions are predicate convictions for a § 922(g)(1) violation, amply establishing Santiago’s status as a convicted felon. … Section 924(e) clearly constitutes an enhancement context.

Audrey Lesavage and Bernard Lesavage v. Gerald White and Phyllis White, James E. Carpenter, Pasco County, Defendants- Bernard Lesavage v. James Carpenter, Gerald White and Phyllis White

755 F.2d 814 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 20, 1985

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), Carpenter enjoyed qualified immunity as a matter of law. … The Court in Harlow said that "where an official's duties legitimately require action in which clearly established rights are not implicated, the public interest may be better served by action taken, 'with independence and

Davide M. Carbone v. Cable News Network, Inc.

910 F.3d 1345 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 13, 2018

In S & Davis International, we held that an order denying foreign sovereign immunity “based on the ‘commercial activity exception’ to sovereign immunity which has a ‘direct effects’ component” was “inextricably intertwined … And in McMahon, we held that orders denying immunity from claims arising incident to military service under Feres v.

Lindsay Acre v. Jason Chambers

648 F. App'x 803 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 18, 2016

Because neither Chambers nor Cox violated clearly established law, we affirm the district court’s judgment. … It is undisputed that Chambers and Cox were acting within their discretionary authority at all times relevant to this case, and they are therefore entitled to qualified immunity unless their conduct violated clearly established

Palmes v. Wainwright

725 F.2d 1511 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 17, 1984

Alpert had been given immunity from prosecution and had cooperated with the law enforcement representatives, Palmes willingly confessed all. … Our review is completed once it is established that a full hearing was conducted in which appellant’s counsel was given an opportunity to present all of the mitigation evidence.

Kenneth Lamonte Webster v. Kevin Beary

228 F. App'x 844 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 4, 2007

We disagree with Webster and Castle.8 Qualified immunity protects government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct “‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Because it is undisputed that Grigsby and Ferrer were acting in the scope of their discretionary authority, the burden shifts to Webster and Castle to establish that the qualified immunity defense does not apply.

Russell v. Perkins Ex Rel. International Management Associates, LLC

781 F.3d 1262 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 19, 2015

The trustee could establish those requirements through “the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness,” or by means of an out-of- court certification procedure established by rule or statute. … The bankruptcy court’s finding that IMA was a Ponzi scheme was not clearly erroneous. AFFIRMED. 15

Jacqueline Lewis v. City of Union City, Georgia

934 F.3d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 15, 2019

Lewis was not a qualified individual. … Lewis's Notice of Appeal stated that she appealed from the judgment dismissing her claims in their entirety, in this Court she failed to address the district court's grant of qualified immunity to Chief Odom in her opening

Edwin Diaz v. Miami-Dade County

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 4, 2021

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged … Because Diaz’s complaint does not establish that Fryer violated his clearly established constitutional rights, we find Diaz has not overcome Fryer’s qualified immunity defense.

Mitchell v. City of LaFayette

504 F. App'x 867 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 28, 2013

They argue that, even if that showing was insufficient, they established a prima facie case by showing that they were more qualified than younger employees who were retained in the same positions they had occupied, that statistical … Further, the evidence that Mitchell and McSears argue indicates that they were better qualified than younger employees who were retained in the RIF does not necessarily show that they were, in fact, more qualified at the