Case law

38 Fair empl.prac.cas. 713, 37 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 35,388 George A. Maddox, William D. Abad, Eric D. Shepherd, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. W. Graham Claytor, Secretary of Navy, in His Official Capacity, His Agents, Employees, and Successors in Office

764 F.2d 1539 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 12, 1985

This finding is not clearly erroneous. Anderson, supra. … Instead, they challenge the district court's finding as clearly erroneous.

George Mark Tuggle v. Victor Hill

280 F. App'x 898 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 4, 2008

immunity. … The district court found that Appellants were not entitled to assert the defense of qualified immunity, and therefore were not entitled summary judgment on any of Appellee George Mark Tuggle’s claims.

Carter v. DecisionOne Corporation

122 F.3d 997 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 18, 1997

It contends that she failed to establish a prima facie case because 1) she did not prove that the decisionmakers knew that she was over forty years of age at the time of her discharge; 2) she was not qualified to continue … Carter also argues that she presented evidence that she was qualified for her position of sales representative.

United States v. Carrell

252 F.3d 1193 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 29, 2001

Additionally, “hearsay testimony may be used to establish probable cause.” 900 Rio Vista Blvd., 803 F.2d at 629 n. 2. … From the perspectives of legislative intent as well as policy, we concluded that “[e]las-sifying post-illegal act transferees as innocent owners because they had no opportunity to consent creates a sweeping grant of immunity

James Johnson v. K-Mart Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 21, 2001

immunity when the courts involved had ruled that material issues of fact were in dispute). … Nor does Robinson clearly contradict Gonzales to the point of implicitly overruling it.

United States v. Jayyousi

657 F.3d 1085 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 19, 2011

not support a conclusion that this finding was clearly erroneous. … Conclusion The old adage that “hard facts make bad law” is clearly evident here.

James Steiner v. United States

940 F.3d 1282 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 16, 2019

At trial, the testimony of Walker and two victims established the following. 1 Steiner, Walker, Wilson, and Ware met up on the evening of the carjacking. … As stated above, there was no evidence presented at trial clearly establishing that Steiner was aware of the guns before his co-conspirators first fired them.

Allison v. McGhan Medical Corp.

184 F.3d 1300 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 18, 1999

Oblique references to local injury in the initial brief are clearly inadequate to preserve the issue. … Cytokines themselves indicate an activation of the immune mechanism. Because of their short half-life, they are very difficult to measure in humans.

William A. White v. Dennis Lemma

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 27, 2020

That does not qualify as a false claim under the FCA. See id. White’s abuse-of-process claim also fails. … Nor does White allege enough facts to establish damages flowing from the counterclaim. Finally, White is not entitled to defense and indemnification under Section 4007.

Paul J. Pyles v. United Air Lines, Inc., a Delaware Corporation

79 F.3d 1046 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 20, 1996

On February 4, 1991, they entered an agreement (the “letter of agreement”) that established a framework for the impending crew transfers. … Pyles, however, is clearly someone who performed services as an employee for “a carrier” — Pan Am.

Xue Xian Jiang v. U.S. Attorney General

568 F.3d 1252 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 22, 2009

To qualify for asylum, the applicant must establish that she has a well-founded fear that she will be persecuted if removed to her home country. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(a)(42), 1158(b)(1), 1231(b)(3). … Quite simply, Jiang’s evidence established a prima facie case for asylum and withholding of removal, especially in light of Li. The BIA clearly abused its discretion in this case too.

MCI WorldCom Network Services, Inc. v. Mastec, Inc.

370 F.3d 1074 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 19, 2004

This investment, MCI asserts, should not serve to immunize Mastec from responsibility for the consequences of its actions. … Moreover, Mastec argues, even assuming that the relevant unit of property is the severed cable, and even assuming that the character of its intended use qualifies for loss of use damages under Florida law, MCI must still

Brian Leslie Young v. Joe Nichols

398 F. App'x 511 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 4, 2010

A right is clearly established for qualified immunity purposes if “(1) case law with indistinguishable facts clearly establish[es] the constitutional right; (2) a broad statement of principle within the Constitution, statute … Accordingly, if the violated right was not clearly established, qualified immunity still applies. Id.

United States v. Tori K. Collins

854 F.3d 1324 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 26, 2017

So, “those [offenses against property] committed by fraud or deceit” must still have property as their object to qualify. … Collins’ role as a bank employee, we do not believe that the district court clearly erred in finding that she could have reasonably foreseen Wells Fargo’s losses.

Daniel Kang v. The Mayor and Alderman of the City of Savannah

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 10, 2025

immunity. … To prevail on a qualified immunity defense, the officers must establish that they were acting under their “discretionary au- thority.” Est. of Cummings v.

Thigpen v. Bibb County, Georgia, Sheriff's Department

223 F.3d 1231 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 7, 2000

Of the three clauses included in the second sentence of the Amendment’s first section— the privileges and immunities clause, the due process clause, and the equal protection clause — only the due process clause alludes to … Plaintiffs argue that the Reeves Decree qualifies as such an “on-going policy” and that, consequently, Beavers controls. Because we conclude that Beavers is distinguishable, we disagree.

Mills v. Singletary

161 F.3d 1273 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 1, 1998

Dugger is thus not clearly erroneous.13 C. … “[W]e defer to the district court’s findings of fact unless we determine that the findings are clearly erroneous.

Perryman v. Johnson Products Co.

698 F.2d 1138 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 22, 1983

The Court wrote that a plaintiff may establish a prima facie case of hiring discrimination by proving (1) that he or she belongs to a protected minority, (2) that he or she applied for and was qualified for a job for which … A plaintiff may establish a prima facie case of promotion discrimination by proving that he or she is a member of a protected minority, was qualified for and applied for the promotion, was rejected despite these qualifications

Horace Luckey III v. Zell Miller, Governor

929 F.2d 618 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 23, 1991

The Miller defendants responded with motions to dismiss asserting the following grounds: (1) immunity under the eleventh amendment; (2) no Article III case or controversy; (3) lack of the requisite degree of substantiality … The law of the case doctrine clearly does not extend to issues an appellate court did not address. Piambino, 757 F.2d at 1120 . The Miller defendants rely on the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Wilcox v.

76 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1745, 72 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 45,113, 47 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1389, 11 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 659 Michael J. Eskra, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant, Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company, Defendant-Counter-Claimant, Appellant/cross-Appellee. Michael J. Eskra, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company, Defendant-Counterclaimant-Appellant

125 F.3d 1406 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 27, 1998

, the inference is raised that discriminatory intent motivated the adverse employment action, and the burden shifts to the employer to "clearly articulate in a reasonably specific manner a legitimate non-discriminatory reason … Provident does not contest that Eskra was in the protected age group and was qualified for the job.