Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
9,466 results
1.44s
United States v. Robert H. Beard
960 F.2d 965 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 18, 1992
Hauswirth, however, decided not to protect Beard and entered into an immunity agreement with the Government. … A careful review of the jury instructions as a whole, does not establish plain error. United States v.
Cited 11 timesPublishedAntonio Love v. Lieutenant Kevin Rodgers
478 F. App'x 652 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 20, 2012
As for his false arrest claim, Love argues that there is a genuine issue of fact regarding whether Rodgers had arguable probable cause to arrest him, and thus whether he was entitled to qualified immunity. … The district court did not err in concluding that, on this record, Cotner and Rodgers were entitled to qualified immunity. We therefore affirm its grant of summary judgment.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSecurities & Exchange Commission v. Merchant Capital, LLC
483 F.3d 747 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 4, 2007
Howard’s testimony therefore did not establish that the partners had a reasonable alternative to Merchant at the time of the initial investment, and the district court clearly erred in concluding otherwise. … A disclaimer does not provide per se immunity, precisely because the disclaimer must be meaningful and tailored to the risks the business faces.
Cited 104 timesPublishedUnited States v. Robert Jenning
599 F.3d 1241 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 16, 2010
with evidence that Standridge was a knowing and willing participant in the scheme: Standridge owned fifty-one percent of MRIK’s stock and was its controlling person and as Brown’s testimony made clear, he and Standridge established … Touchet argues (1) he did not qualify for a three level enhancement as a “manager or supervisor”; (2) he did not qualify for a two level enhancement for obstruction of justice; (3) he did not qualify for a two level enhancement
Cited 61 timesPublishedThomas v. Bank of America Corp.
570 F.3d 1280 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 12, 2009
On July 30, 2008, Bank of America filed a Notice of Removal to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, contending that jurisdiction was appropriate because the action qualified as a “mass action … Senior Operations Project Manager of Bank of America. 4 argued that because Thomas sought treble damages under the RICO statute and attorneys’ fees, the amount in controversy clearly
Cited 5 timesPublished872 F.2d 361 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 2, 1989
A finding on the issue of intentional discrimination may be reversed only if it is clearly erroneous. Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 285-90 , 102 S.Ct. 1781, 1788-91 , 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982). … This Court has stated that, in the context of wrongful discharge, the factors are as follows: The plaintiff must establish that (i) he is a member of a minority; (ii) that he was qualified for the job; (iii) that he was discharged
Cited 0 timesPublishedJoseph Todd Eric Brown v. City of Clewiston and Luis Perez
848 F.2d 1534 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 13, 1988
The Gamer decision did not purport to establish a new standard applicable in state tort law actions. … See also Walker & LaBerge, Inc., 344 So.2d at 243 (refusing to apply retroactively an amendment that eliminated “a substantive statutory right (immunity from suit)....
Cited 93 timesPublishedUnited States v. Lawrence L. Ghidoni
732 F.2d 814 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 2, 1984
It also would indicate the taxpayer’s belief that the papers are those described in the subpoena____ The elements of compulsion are clearly present, but the more difficult issues are whether the tacit averments of the taxpayer … In concluding that the government could not use the directive, we are not affording Ghidoni any "constructive immunity” regarding subsequent use of the directive.
Disagreed with by In Re Grand Jury Proceedings. Appeal of William A. Ranauro, 814 F.2d 791 (1987)Cited 25 timesPublishedHillsborough County v. Star Insurance Company
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 3, 2017
cap established by § 768.28(5) and the $350,000 SIRL. … First, the words “insurance coverage” in § 768.28(5) indicate that one must look to the terms of the policy to determine what is covered, and here the policy clearly requires that Star consent to any settlement that would
Cited 0 timesPublishedNordberg v. Granfinanciera, S.A. (In re Chase & Sanborn Corp.)
835 F.2d 1341 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 19, 1988
under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. … FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITIES ACT The United States follows the “restrictive” theory of sovereign immunity.
Reversed on other grounds by Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg, 492 U.S. 33 (1989)Cited 23 timesPublished837 F.2d 1534 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 29, 1988
Just because test questions are drafted by qualified city employees does not mean that the questions are job-related. Even qualified supervisory personnel can construct test questions very unrelated to job performance. … The district court's finding that the test was a business necessity is therefore clearly erroneous.
Vacated by Consolidated City of Jacksonville v. Nash, 490 U.S. 1103 (1989)Cited 4 timesPublishedStarship Enterprises of Atlanta, Inc. v. Coweta County, Georgia
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 14, 2013
Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … If operated as stocked on January 26, however, the store would qualify as a sexually oriented business under the new ordinance and, as such, would not qualify for a general business license.
Cited 0 timesPublished244 F.3d 807 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 27, 2001
The present class definition includes participants in the Waiver Program "who are not receiving needed services under the Waiver for which they are qualified and eligible." … As a result, the class definition will more clearly reflect Plaintiffs' core claim for declaratory and injunctive relief from Defendants' alleged policy of "capping" the amount of money that they will spend on needed HCBW
Cited 40 timesPublished504 F.3d 1345 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 26, 2007
The testimony from these witnesses clearly established that no one, including Walter and Deborah, was entitled to receive Verlon’s VA benefits after her death, but that in spite of this, Walter and Deborah had continued … Those two facts were clearly established by the evidence. 7 What was not established by the evidence, however, was that either Walter or Deborah had any knowledge that
Cited 29 timesPublished764 F.2d 1459 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 9, 1985
Judicial review, however, is the rule and nonreviewability is a narrow exception which must be clearly demonstrated. City of Santa Clara v. … It does not establish an entitlement to power. Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, 16 U.S.C.A.
Cited 0 timesPublishedECB USA, Inc. v. Chubb Insurance Company of New Jersey
113 F.4th 1312 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2024
The series-qualifier canon helps us understand the meaning of items in a list with a parallel construction that are modified by an adjective, adverb, or qualifying phrase. … First, the relevant phrase here involves none of the parts of speech to which the last-antecedent canon is most clearly useful.
Cited 20 timesPublishedRobert Dale Harris v. Michael D. Chapman
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 19, 2021
Thus, the burden shifts to Harris to show that, taking the facts in the light most favorable to him, (1) Wingo and Chapman violated his constitutional right, and (2) this right was clearly established at the time of the … Because the deputies lacked arguable probable cause to arrest Harris on either count, we easily determine that the arrest violated Harris’s clearly established Fourth Amendment rights. See Skop v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 30, 2024
The District Court dismissed Rojas’s complaint on the basis of qualified immunity, finding that Rojas did not show that she had a clearly established right to an evidentiary hearing on her state petition … Hendrix moved to dismiss the suit, and the District Court found that Rojas’s claim is barred by qualified immunity because she did not show that the right at issue was clearly established at 1 The record
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedOberist Lee Saunders v. Sheriff of Brevard County
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 17, 2018
established Eighth Amendment rights that qualified immunity does not apply. … Because Corporal Wright’s Eighth Amendment violation was clearly established, he is not entitled to qualified immunity. B.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedUnited States v. Jerry Sanchez Carrasquillo
4 F.4th 1265 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 2021
We explained that “to negate the government’s initial showing of possession to avoid the enhancement, a defendant must show that it is clearly improbable the gun was connected to the offense, but to qualify for the safety … Because that factual finding is not clearly erroneous, Mr. Carrasquillo has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the Glock was not possessed “in connection with the offense” under § 5C1.2(a)(2).
Cited 16 timesPublished
Ask Donna