Case law

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 .

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

Donovan v. Dillingham

688 F.2d 1367 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 15, 1982

Once it is determined that ERISA covers a plan, the Act's fiduciary and reporting provisions do require the plan to be established pursuant to a written instrument, ERISA §§ 102 and 402, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1022 and 1102; but clearly … The district court's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous, and under those facts the district court was entitled to conclude that Taggart Corporation's involvement in the transaction was not such that it established

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.

Daniel Burns v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

720 F.3d 1296 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 8, 2013

The Florida Supreme Court’s determination is neither contrary to nor an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. … It takes no great logical leap to conclude that a state court’s decision cannot be contrary to clearly established federal law when there is no clearly established Supreme Court precedent. See Dombrowski v.

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.

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.

Cachia v. Islamorada

542 F.3d 839 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2008

complaint against Islamorada before the district court seeking damages and injunctive relief on the grounds that the ordinance’s formula restaurant provisions violated the Equal Protection, Due Process, Privileges and Immunities … is directed equally at interstate and local businesses, and has “only indirect effects on interstate commerce,” we “examine[ ] whether the State’s interest is legitimate and whether the burden on interstate commerce clearly

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.

Schwartz v. Florida Board of Regents

954 F.2d 620 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 25, 1991

Schwartz also asserts that the court’s finding that the defendants established non-discriminatory reasons for the pay disparity is clearly erroneous. … clearly erroneous.

Armstrong v. Dugger

833 F.2d 1430 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 23, 1987

The demonstrated availability of undiscovered mitigating evidence clearly met the prejudice requirement. See Strickland, 466 U.S. at 696 , 104 S.Ct. at 2069 . III. … Armstrong argues that although the jury was informed of Shaw's immunity with respect to a related crime, she was still subject to perjury charges.

United States v. Gregory Welch

683 F.3d 1304 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 13, 2012

Denial of a motion to suppress is a mixed question of law and fact.3 The district court’s findings of fact control unless they are clearly erroneous, but its interpretation and application of law are reviewed de novo.4 … version of state law that the defendant was actually convicted of violating.”27 In 1996, when Welch pleaded guilty to robbery, Florida law clearly established that a taking by stealth, as in pickpocketing where

National Companies Health Benefit Plan v. St. Joseph's Hospital of Atlanta, Inc.

929 F.2d 1558 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 30, 1991

In order for a qualified beneficiary to receive continuation coverage, one of several “qualifying event[s]” must occur. … other qualifying events, the maximum length of time is generally thirty-six months from the date of the qualifying event, id. § 1162(2)(A)(ii)-(v).

Ward v. U.S. Attorney General

608 F.3d 1198 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 2, 2010

would qualify him under the CSPA’s retroactivity provision. … The Wards argue that the CSPA altered this established framework by allowing a derivative child to retain his or her following-to-join status when a principal parent dies.

United States v. Michael St. Hubert

883 F.3d 1319 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 2018

Meacham, 626 F.2d 503 (5th Cir. 1980), establishes that a district court is without jurisdiction to accept a guilty plea to a ‘non-offense.’” … Ct. at 379-80; While these decisions are relevant to our analytical approach, they did not involve Hobbs Act robbery or attempted robbery, or the use-of-force clause in § 924(c)(3)(A), and thus are not clearly on

Capital Asset Research Corp. v. Finnegan

160 F.3d 683 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 13, 1998

Neither of these considerations finds adequate support in the record to qualify as a trade secret. … It is true that the testimony at trial established that the public records do 6 not indicate the dates on which the owners made payments.

William E. Jones v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority

681 F.2d 1376 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 6, 1982

Clearly, the restrictions *1381 found in Section 604 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 constitute neither a right nor a remedy under the aforementioned definitions. … As a general rule, laws which fix duties, establish rights and responsibilities among and for persons ... are ‘substantive laws’____” Black’s Law Dictionary, supra, at 1083.

United States v. Jones

913 F.2d 1552 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 11, 1990

The requisite intent is clearly established by the evidence outlined above. See United States v. … They contend that, instead of establishing a single conspiracy, the evidence did no more than establish the existence of multiple conspiracies between David Sanford Jones and each of the defendants separately.

City of Tuscaloosa v. Harcros Chemicals, Inc.

158 F.3d 548 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 23, 1998

He is no more qualified than Dr. McClave to testify on opinions based on economic theory. … Furthermore, we point out that Lanzillotti's professed market definition is clearly wrong.