Case law

Donovan Schilling v. Michael Doherty

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 13, 2026

But it does not matter because there were other videos clearly showing Schilling walking in the street with cars nearby. … That will not do. 1 Because there was no constitutional violation, we do not address the other issues raised by the parties on appeal—whether the officers were entitled to qualified immunity

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeffrey Allan FISCHER, Defendant-Appellant

168 F.3d 1273 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 4, 1999

For example, evidence introduced at the trial in this case clearly established that, in 1993, WVHA received between ten and fifteen million dollars under the federal Medicare assistance program. … The finance director’s testimony did not clearly establish whether WVHA received funds directly from the Medicare program or received funds as an assignee under Part B or even Part A of the federal program.

Antonio Lebaron Melton v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 2, 2015

it is debatable whether the Supreme Court of Florida unreasonably applied clearly established federal law, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). … First, Melton fails to establish that there is a debatable question about whether the Supreme Court of Florida unreasonably applied clearly established federal law when it decided that “nowhere did the Supreme Court [of

Robert Dale Harris v. Kasey P. Wingo

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.

Judicial Complaint, In Re:

183 F.3d 1277 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 11, 1999

. § 1608(e) (1994) (prohibiting default judgment against foreign sovereign unless plaintiff establishes claim “by evidence satisfactory to the court”). … Ed. 2d 46 (1983) [hereinafter Bancec], however, teaches that things are not that simple.16 According to Bancec, “[t]he language and history of the FSIA clearly establish that the Act was not intended to affect the

Lucero v. Operation Rescue of Birmingham

954 F.2d 624 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 16, 1992

Plaintiffs failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits because they did not state a claim under section 1985(3). … The majority regards this "finding" as not clearly erroneous. Majority op. at 628. There are several problems with this analysis.

United States v. Moore

504 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

Cambridge University Press v. Patton

769 F.3d 1232 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 17, 2014

Congress established that doctrine to ensure that works created with new technologies, perhaps not in existence at the time of the Copyright Act of 1976, would qualify for copyright protection. See id. … Because this finding is not clearly erroneous, we will not disturb it.

Hannibal Buress v. Elio Villegas

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 15, 2022

As to Villegas, he alleged fail- ure to intervene, and Villegas moved to dismiss based on qualified immunity. … “Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government of- ficials acting within their discretionary authority are immune from suit unless the official’s conduct violates clearly established federal statutory or constitutional

Bryan Alexander Blount v. Culliver

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 5, 2023

. § 1983, on the grounds of qualified immunity. … If the defendants establish that they were acting within the scope of their discretionary authority, the burden shifts to the plain- tiff to demonstrate that qualified immunity is inappropriate.

Ernest Charles Downs v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

738 F.3d 240 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 5, 2013

Further, “it is not an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law for a state court to decline to apply a specific legal rule that has not been squarely established by the [Supreme Court].” … Much less can we say that the Florida courts’ rejection of Downs’s argument was contrary to clearly established Supreme Court precedent. See § 2254(d).

Johnson v. DeSoto County Board of Commissioners

72 F.3d 1556 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 23, 1996

The Gadsden County panel, one year after Escambia County had been decided, again applied the "clearly erroneous" standard; it reversed as clearly erroneous in light of the evidence presented in that case, a district … The State argued that its districting plan should be immune from challenge under § 2 because minority voters formed effective voting majorities in a number of districts roughly proportional to their shares in the voting-age

Calvin Roderick CARMICHAEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BIRMINGHAM SAW WORKS, Defendant-Appellee

738 F.2d 1126 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 9, 1984

This Court may reverse a district court’s finding of no intentional discrimination only if that finding is clearly erroneous, or is based on clearly erroneous subsidiary findings of fact or on a mistaken view of the law. … A complainant establishes a prima facie case of racial discrimination “by showing (i) that he belongs to a racial minority; (ii) that he applied and *1131 was qualified for a job for which the employer was seeking applicants

Maldonado v. U.S. Attorney General

664 F.3d 1369 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 22, 2011

As several of our sister circuits have recognized, these two provisions read together amply establish that Congress intended the new definition of aggravated felony to apply to prior convictions. … INS, 272 F.3d 433, 439 (7th Cir. 2001) (“Congress has clearly manifested an intent to apply the amended definition of ‘aggravated felony’ retroactively.”); Aragon-Ayon v.

United States v. Mario Estrella

758 F.3d 1239 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 10, 2014

This conduct clearly targets property and not a person. … It clearly does.

United States v. Thomas Patrick Keelan

786 F.3d 865 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 13, 2015

Ct. 377, 381 (2004). 6 Florida Statute 800.04 qualifies as a “crime of violence” within the meaning of U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2. … We cannot conclude the district court clearly erred in finding Keelan proximately caused J.S.’s mental health treatment expenses. IV.

Antonio 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.

Orlando Bethel v. Town of Loxley

221 F. App'x 812 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 26, 2006

Because the Bethels’ First or Fourth Amendment rights were not infringed, we need not address whether (1) the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, (2) Magistrate Hicks is entitled to judicial immunity … Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151, 2156, 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) (qualified immunity); Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478, 492, 111 S.Ct. 1934, 1941, 114 L.Ed.2d 547 (1991) (judicial immunity); Monell v.

Amber Jernigan v. City of Montgomery, Alabama

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 10, 2020

Officer Browning enjoys qualified immunity for his discretionary acts so long as his “conduct [did not] violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Like the officers in Post and Washington, Officer Browning was entitled to qualified immunity.

National Bancard Corporation (Nabanco), a Florida Corporation v. Visa U.S.A., Inc.

779 F.2d 592 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 10, 1986

The fees for these licenses were set by ASCAP and BMI and clearly qualified as price fixing in a strict sense. BMI, 441 U.S. at 8 , 99 S.Ct. at 1556 , 60 L.Ed.2d at 9 . … Finley & Co., 676 F.2d 1291 , 1299 (9th Cir.1982) (market findings not disturbed unless clearly erroneous).