Case law

United States v. Dodge

554 F.3d 1357 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 14, 2009

. § 1470 is not an “other criminal offense” for purposes of subsection (6), Dodge argues that federal offenses that qualify as *1361 sex offenses are enumerated, or “specified” as a “sex offense,” by 42 U.S.C. § 16911 (5) … Given that other well-established canons of interpretation weigh against the Dissent’s interpretation, notably the principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius and the "rule of lenity” (see United States v.

Caitlin Childs v. Detective D.A. Gorman

416 F. App'x 829 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 1, 2011

Gorman contends that even if his actions amounted to an unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment, such violation was not clearly established at the time of his interactions with Plaintiffs. … In light of this evidence, we conclude that the district court was correct in denying qualified 7 immunity to Gorman because it was clearly established that a seizure without

Walker v. Smith

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 28, 1998

The court then held that the district court was correct in determining that the plaintiff had failed to establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination for failure to promote because the plaintiff had “clearly failed to … Id. at 339 (emphasis omitted).28 Thus, in East, we clearly placed relative 27 We found that Romine failed to establish a prima facie case with regard to the 1968 claim because “no position was open at

Strickland v. Alderman

74 F.3d 260 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 6, 1996

this court adopted as precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decided prior to October 1, 1981. 3 Appellants also challenge the district court's denial of the motion on the basis of qualified … immunity.

Willett v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield

953 F.2d 1335 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 19, 1992

The record does not clearly establish whether or not Willett obtained COBRA coverage, and the district court made no factual finding on this matter. … Silas therefore qualifies as a “plan participant,” even though he was never entitled to vested benefits under the terms of the Mays plan. 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002 (7).

Hills McGee v. Sentinel Offender Services, LLC

719 F.3d 1236 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 6, 2013

material fact, the burden of production shifts to the nonmoving party, who must identify evidence in the record or present 7 McGee argues in his brief that, though Sentinel is a private company, it still qualifies … as a governmental entity under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(5)(A) because Sentinel is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity.

Thomas v. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD ASS'N

594 F.3d 814 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 20, 2010

As part of the settlement, the Blue Cross plans agreed to implement business practice initiatives and establish a settlement fund for payment of claims to class members. … The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation “clearly shows the analysis was conducted separately for” Kolbusz’s claims of tortious interference and defamation. Id.

Yurg Bigler v. U.S. Attorney General

451 F.3d 728 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 27, 2006

The IJ of the contested removability hearing found that the government clearly established Bigler’s removability. … The first and fifth circuits have noted that, “[t]o qualify as a returning resident alien, an alien must have acquired lawful permanent resident status in accordance with our laws, must have retained that status from the

Mozelle J. Thomas v. City of Jacksonville

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 23, 2018

“The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation. … might overcome Defendants’ qualified-immunity defense3—and we must therefore grant Defendants qualified immunity as to Plaintiffs’ federal claims. 4 3 Seeking to satisfy qualified immunity’s clearly-established prong

Tannenbaum v. United States

148 F.3d 1262 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 4, 1998

The Court noted that it has long held that "a plea does not qualify as intelligent unless a criminal defendant receives "real notice of the true nature of the charge against him.'" Id., citing Smith v. … Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err in denying Tannenbaum's § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence for the violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1).

Eloy Rojas Mamani v. Jose Carlos Sanchez Berzain

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2011

immunity and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. … And the well- pleaded facts in this case do not equal the kind of conduct that has been already clearly established by international law as extrajudicial killings or as crimes against humanity.

Ellis Banking Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service

688 F.2d 1376 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 15, 1982

It is not enough to establish that expenditures are incurred in carrying on a trade or business to qualify for a deduction under section 162 — all of the requirements set out above must be fulfilled. … That view of the facts is not clearly erroneous.

Charlotte Salinero v. Johnson & Johnson

995 F.3d 959 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 29, 2021

They alleged that a polypropylene mesh is “biologically incompatible with human tissue and promotes an immune response in a large subset of the population[,] . . . … Michael Margolis, on the grounds that he was not qualified to testify about the adequacy of the Artisyn Y-Mesh IFU.

Jessup v. Miami-Dade County

440 F. App'x 689 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 1, 2011

“It is clearly established that an arrest made without probable cause violates the Fourth Amendment.” Redd v. City of Enterprise, 140 F.3d 1378, 1382 (11th Cir.1998). … immunity.

Jeffrey Hayes v. Director, OWCP

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 7, 2026

In any event, the judge found that Ermine worked for six “full calendar years for [Cowin & Com- pany] in qualifying coal mine employment.” … The Act does not define “year” for establishing this pre- sumption.

Treadwell v. Alexander

707 F.2d 473 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 16, 1983

Treadwell could not do the work. 7 Treadwell faults the district court's conclusion that he was unable to perform the essentials of the park technician's job. 5 He argues the court improperly excluded the evidence which established … Nothing in the record suggests Treadwell met this evidentiary requirement or that the court's conclusions were clearly erroneous. 15 AFFIRMED. 1 Codified at 29 U.S.C.A.

Georgia Association of Retarded Citizens, Cross v. Dr. Charles McDaniel Etc., Cross-Appellees

716 F.2d 1565 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 2, 1983

The district court clearly found a procedural injury. … The Supreme Court concluded that Davis was not otherwise qualified because she could never benefit from the school’s program.

John Pablo Campos v. City of Naples

202 F. App'x 381 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 25, 2006

Two days before the expiration of the deadline, on February 13, 2006, defendants filed their motion, asserting both the Heck and qualified immunity defenses. … He also made the argument, unsupported by any legal authority, that defendants had waived their right to assert qualified immunity because the motion was not filed “in an expeditious manner.”

Gill v. Mecusker

633 F.3d 1272 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 23, 2011

The Court also explained that, in determining whether a state court’s decision represents an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, a federal court conducting habeas review “may not issue the writ … simply because that court concludes in its independent judgment that the relevant state-court decision applied clearly established federal law erroneously or incorrectly.

E.S. Binnings, Inc. v. M/V Saudi Riyadh

815 F.2d 660 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 29, 1987

Nevertheless, the rule has been firmly established since the Supreme Court decision in Minturn v. Maynard, 58 U.S. (17 How.) 476 , 15 L.Ed. 235 (1854). … The parties have raised a number of other issues on appeal, including whether Binnings’ services qualify as "other necessaries” and can be said to have been furnished to the Saudi Riyadh under the FMLA.