Case law

For Your Eyes Alone, Inc. v. City of Columbus, Ga.

281 F.3d 1209 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 6, 2002

liability in civil rights cases, and qualified immunity barred the FYEA Appellants’ claims. … “[F]ederal courts have a virtually unflagging obligation to exercise their jurisdiction except in those extraordinary circumstances where the order to the parties to repair to the State court would clearly serve an important

Johnnie Mae Cole v. Farm Fresh Poultry, Inc.

824 F.2d 923 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 19, 1987

The second is that oral advice cannot qualify as an agency’s written interpretation. E.g., Soler, 615 F.Supp. at 747 ; Pilkenton v. … We hold that in order to qualify for the good-faith defense of section 259 the statute’s requirement that the agency interpretation be in writing must be obeyed.

Sandra R. Worsham and Walter J. Worsham, Iii, Cross-Appellants v. United States of America, Cross-Appellee

828 F.2d 1525 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 5, 1987

Where there are two permissible views of the evidence, the factfinder’s choice between them cannot be clearly erroneous. Anderson v. … It is well established that sovereign immunity principles prevent anyone from suing the United States government without its consent. See McGowan v.

United States v. Albert Turner, in Re Howard Moore, Jr.

812 F.2d 1552 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 30, 1987

I am saying that this testimony, if it is offered to show that — on the subject of whether he voted or not, his grand jury testimony is inconsistent with his testimony here, it doesn’t establish that, in my view, and I don … He was on the list of qualified voters as of September 4, 1984. If he had not been on the list of qualified voters, Auburtin would never have sent him an absentee ballot.

Alberto Dominguez v. Paul Abreu

610 F. App'x 948 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 27, 2015

Dominguez’s favor establish that he was handcuffed and compliant,1 there is, consequently, a triable 1 “We review de novo the district court’s disposition of a summary judgment motion based on qualified immunity, resolving … Our case law does not support extending qualified immunity where the level of force used against a secured, compliant suspect was analogous to the aggressive takedown that occurred here.

Clint Roberts v. Matthew J. Kahl

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 3, 2021

“The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from suit in their individual capacities unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … and (2) the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.

Akeem Muhammad v. Julie Jones

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 25, 2023

“Qualified immunity offers complete protection for govern- ment officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … “Even if the prison’s policies were improper, the prison offi- cials would be entitled to qualified immunity” “unless it is shown that they violated a constitutional right that was clearly established

Tamara Perry v. Greene County, Georgia

392 F. App'x 761 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 16, 2010

immunity. … Pastor, 351 F.3d 1080, 1089 (11th Cir. 2003) (holding that officers are entitled to qualified immunity “if there was arguable probable cause for the arrest.”).

Grier v. Secretary of the Army

799 F.2d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 19, 1986

Although plaintiff has never clearly set forth her APA claim, it appears that she seeks review under § 706(2)(A) and (D). 4 Her unsupported contention that de novo review is warranted under § 706(2)(F) must be rejected, because … Defendants are also entitled to judgment as a matter of law on plaintiff’s claim under § 706(2)(D) that established personnel procedures were not followed.

Oliver Ex Rel. Estate of Oliver v. Orange County

456 F. App'x 815 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 31, 2012

The district court denied Taser’s Daubert motion, as well as the summary judgment motion based on qualified immunity filed by defendants Fiorino, Burk and the City of Orlando. … The officers then appealed the order denying their summary judgment motion requesting qualified immunity, and we affirmed. On remand, a new judge was assigned to the case.

Robert JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LUMBERJACK MEATS, INC., a Corporation, Defendant-Appellee

680 F.2d 98 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 6, 1982

Once a prima facie case is established, the defendant must articulate some legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for an action. … Even accepting his assertions, we do not find that they render the district court’s findings clearly erroneous. 9 .

Glassco v. Miller Equipment Company

966 F.2d 641 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 20, 1992

First, the contractor must establish that its activity involves a "uniquely federal" interest warranting the displacement of state law. Id. at 504 , 108 S.Ct. at 2514 . … Miller's manufacture of the lineman's belts for the Army was clearly a matter of "uniquely federal" interest.

United States v. Jeffrey Alan Horn

129 F.4th 1275 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 24, 2025

The district court did not clearly err because the evidence establishes that Horn qualifies for this enhancement. … The record is thus clear that the district court understood that Horn qualified for the enhancement as a broker or dealer, and the district court did not clearly err.

Steven K. Dunlap v. G &L Holding Group

381 F.3d 1285 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 27, 2004

In order for a state-law claim to raise substantial questions of federal law, “[federal] law must be an essential element of [Dunlap's] claim[, and] the federal right or immunity that forms the basis of the claim must be … An idea, therefore, does not substantively qualify for protection under the Copyright Act, no matter how “original” it may be.

Earl Hughes Burgest v. United States

316 F. App'x 955 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 3, 2009

did violate Burgest’s constitutional right to privacy, such a right was not clearly established at the time of the violation. 3  We address in this appeal whether Burgest … DISCUSSION West argues that the she is entitled to qualified immunity because Burgest has not produced any admissible evidence of a constitutional violation.

United States v. Frank Robert Briggman

931 F.2d 705 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 29, 1991

Numerous crimes, including larcenies and robberies, recently had occurred in the surrounding business establishments. … Because Briggman had three prior felony convictions for violent crimes, he qualified as an armed career criminal subject to enhanced penalty provisions under 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e)(1).

Amanda Kondrat'yev v. City of Pensacola, Florida

949 F.3d 1319 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 19, 2020

When an intervening Supreme Court decision is “clearly on point” and “clearly inconsistent” with preexisting Eleventh Circuit precedent, Garrett v. Univ. … on point” and “clearly inconsistent” with Rabun.

Estate of H. Floyd Sherrod, H. Floyd Sherrod, Jr. And Estalee Sherrod Sandlin, Co-Executors v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

774 F.2d 1057 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 25, 1985

Clearly, this land was not employed in an active trade or business of the decedent or of a member of *1064 his family as is called for in the statute. … for special use valuation. 12 The tax court suggested that *1067 the decedent’s use of his rental income to pay the local taxes on his property helped to establish a functional relationship between the rented land and the

Susan Porter v. Ricky L. Jewell

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 27, 2012

Qualified immunity shields a government official sued in his individual capacity from liability for section 1983 claims if the official’s conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … Because Porter failed to establish that Officer Jewell’s conduct resulted in a constitutional violation, Officer Jewell was entitled to qualified immunity.

Ward v. Retirement Board of Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan

643 F.3d 1331 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 2011

That clearly prohibits the disability benefits in this case from being subject to the specific performance (“other legal process”) awarded to the Ward Firm in the state court judgments. … See 29 U.S.C. § 1102(a)(1) (“Every employee benefit plan shall be 7 established and maintained pursuant to a written instrument.”); Hunt v.