Case law

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.

Miccosukee Tribe Of Indians Of Florida v. Florida State Athletic Commission

226 F.3d 1226 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 26, 2000

The plaintiff has the burden to "clearly and specifically set forth facts sufficient to satisfy [ ] Art. III standing requirements." … law clearly characterizes the Florida Commission as a state agency.

Anthony Colon v. Wendell Smith

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 22, 2024

“Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suits in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional … official’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the official’s conduct.

Hardy v. Birmingham Board of Education

954 F.2d 1546 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 5, 1992

Whether a city or county board of education "is to be treated as an arm of the State partaking of the State's Eleventh Amendment immunity, or is instead to be treated as a municipal corporation or other political subdivision … Upon the employee review panel's selection to hear a case, the panel shall within 10 days establish a date, place, and time for the hearing to be conducted....

Stephen Hammonds v. Dr. Robert Theakston

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 3, 2020

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity under that version of the facts.” … rights were clearly established— “in either order.”

James M. Dollar and Etta Marie Dollar v. Haralson County, Georgia

704 F.2d 1540 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 19, 1983

Smith testified at trial that as of September 1978 he had established the Kiser Creek ford as the “top priority,” the “most needed place in the county” for a bridge. … County Commissioner Smith clearly was acting under authority of state law when he decided against building the bridge.

Morrison, Incorporated, Cross-Appellants v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Cross-Appellee

891 F.2d 857 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 9, 1990

Section 48(a), therefore, establishes two categories of section 38 property — “tangible personal property” and “other tangible property” used in conjunction with an enumerated activity. … With these principles we review the Tax Court’s findings concerning which equipment categories qualify as tangible personal property utilizing the clearly erroneous standard.

Gene Thompson Lumber Co. v. Davis Parmer Lumber Co.

984 F.2d 401 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 26, 1993

In this appeal, Davis-Parmer asks us to set aside the district court’s judgment on the following grounds: (1) Davis-Parmer enjoyed qualified immunity, (2) Thompson Lumber failed to establish that DavisParmer’s acts caused … Section 1983 provides that “[ejvery person who, under color of any statute ... of any State ... subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

United States v. Jimmy Lightsey

120 F.4th 851 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 31, 2024

on point and clearly contrary to the panel precedent.” 4 Edwards v. … Tay- lor is clearly on point and clearly contrary to our decision in Joyner and has undermined Joyner to the point of abrogation. See Archer, 531 F.3d at 1352.

McKinley v. Kaplan

177 F.3d 1253 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 14, 1999

In the instant case, pursuant to well-established precedent, the county is a proper defendant in a § 1983 action and can be liable for money damages. See Owen v. … The Second Circuit held that a money damages claim would have been substantively without merit because the state enjoyed Eleventh Amendment immunity, and the individual defendants would be protected by qualified immunity

Jennifer Case v. Kay Ivey

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 5, 2022

Plaintiffs now appeal, ar- guing that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity be- cause (1) they acted outside of their discretionary authority, and (2) even if they didn’t, they violated clearly established law … for qualified-immunity purposes, such as when “a broader, clearly established principle should control the novel facts of a par- ticular situation,” or when an official’s conduct “so obviously violates the con- stitution

Gene and Debra Webb v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

872 F.2d 380 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 5, 1989

The Tax Court found that the Webbs had failed to establish that they had made deductible charitable contributions to an organization qualified to receive such contributions under 26 U.S.C.A. § 170 (c)(2)(B). 2 The Tax Court … The Tax Court’s findings must stand unless clearly erroneous. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278, 291 , 80 S.Ct. 1190, 1199-1200 , 4 L.Ed.2d 1218 (1960).

William Mann v. Henry Adrian Joseph

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 2020

The district court concluded that the officers arrested Mann without arguable probable cause, but ruled that they enjoyed qualified immunity because no existing law clearly established Mann had a “right to carry a weapon … The officers invoked the defense of qualified immunity, which entitles them to avoid liability for discretionary acts they undertook in their individual capacity so long as “their conduct [did not] violate[] clearly established

Darren L. Washington v. Sgt. Harris

186 F. App'x 865 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 23, 2006

Washington, a prisoner, appeals the district court’s dismissal on qualified immunity grounds of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against the Appellees. … Moreover, even assuming that Deas’s behavior was sufficiently repugnant to give rise to a constitutional claim, no case law clearly establishes that such conduct violates the Constitution, and thus we cannot say that any

Monique Wilkerson v. Thedious Seymour

626 F. App'x 816 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 10, 2015

We conclude that he is not entitled to qualified immunity and therefore affirm. … of qualified immunity.” 1 Priester v.

In re Parker

827 F.3d 1286 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 7, 2016

granted only if this Court certifies that the second or successive motion contains a claim involving: (1) newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish … See id. at 827 F.3d at 1338-39 (holding that we may only deny an application if the ACCA predicates “identified” by the sentencing court clearly were not affected by Johnson).

William Stephen Hall v. H. R. Smith

170 F. App'x 105 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 7, 2006

In addition, qualified immunity provides complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct violates no “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … In evaluating whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, as a threshold matter, we must determine “whether [the] plaintiff's allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation.” Id. at 1268.

Gustavo Abella v. Officer Juan F. Rodriguez

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 31, 2020

And, as he did in 2013, Rodriguez argues on appeal that he is entitled to qualified immunity to that claim. … Rodriguez filed a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, which the district court denied.

London R. Bouvier v. Officer Starr Smith

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 20, 2023

Regarding whether the officers violated a clearly established right, the district court stated that the officers were “mistaken when they contend that the only way to show a violation of a clearly … Qualified immunity shields officials who are acting within their discretionary authority from liability when their conduct does not violate a constitutional right that was clearly established at the

Jill Gray v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia Delmas Allen, in Both His Official and Individual Capacity

150 F.3d 1347 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 2, 1998

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the grounds of immunity (11th Amendment and qualified) was denied as moot because the district court dismissed plaintiff’s federal and constitutional claims. … We do not consider these immunity issues. . We only discuss the tenure issue; we see no reversible error on the other claims, including the sex and age discrimination claims. .