Case law

Kimberly Annette Ellison v. Kenneth Warren Hobbs

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2019

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The qualified immunity defense shields “government officials performing discretionary functions . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … qualified immunity defense.

Federal Trade Commission v. Abbvie Products LLC

713 F.3d 54 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 21, 2013

The panel in Watson based its decision largely on prior precedent, which “establish[ed] the rule that, absent sham litigation or fraud in obtaining the patent, a reverse payment settlement is immune from antitrust attack … Solvay identifies several errors in the district court’s decision that, according to Solvay, each qualifies as an abuse of discretion.

United States v. Roger v. Evans

478 F.3d 1332 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 16, 2007

To establish plain error, a defendant must show there is (1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that affects substantial rights. … In other words, it is proper to argue cases under § 3559 or § 16 to prove cases under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2, because every offense that qualifies under either of those two statutes will also qualify under the guideline, but the

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.

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.

Rebecca K. Haberski v. Andrea Bufano

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 13, 2018

“Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … To avoid summary judgment based on qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show both that the defendant violated a constitutional right and that the right was already clearly established -- given the circumstances -- when

Jessica N. Rogers v. John Gaddis

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 9, 2021

The district court ruled that Gaddis and Bauman’s argument for summary judgment based on qualified immunity “[wa]sn’t . . . close.” … DISCUSSION Gaddis and Bauman argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Scheurenbrand v. Wood Gundy Corp.

8 F.3d 1547 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 13, 1993

Question nine of the special verdict form read: "Did the securities qualify for an exemption from registration under Florida law?" … Based upon this evidence, the trial court con- *1551 eluded in the memorandum accompanying its final order and judgment in this case that "[t]he evidence clearly established that plaintiffs still own the securities in question

Pittman v. Secretary

998 F.2d 887 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 3, 1993

DISCUSSION 9 The Medicaid Act establishes a state and federal cooperative program, in which states may choose to participate. … Once the state agrees to participate in the program, it must establish a plan that meets stated requirements.

Jessica N. Rogers v. John Gaddis

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 9, 2021

The district court ruled that Gaddis and Bauman’s argument for summary judgment based on qualified immunity “[wa]sn’t . . . close.” … DISCUSSION Gaddis and Bauman argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Elizabeth Leigh Butler v. Paul Tremblay

699 F. App'x 913 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 26, 2017

Because Butler does not dispute that Tremblay was acting within his discretionary authority, the only issue we need address is whether Butler established that the officer violated clearly established law. … Tremblay was entitled to qualified immunity. Tremblay also was immune from liability under state law.

Dana's Railroad Supply v. Attorney General, State of Florida

807 F.3d 1235 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 4, 2015

With our jurisdiction established, we proceed to the merits. III. … Florida’s no-surcharge law clearly touches on economic activity.

Harvey R. Johnson v. Kevin Burden

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 9, 2019

Defendants also contend that, even if Bivens did extend to Johnson’s claims, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Regarding qualified immunity, the district court concluded that, assuming Defendants acted within the scope of their employment, they were not entitled to qualified immunity because Johnson alleged facts demonstrating

Trinet Group, Inc. v. United States

979 F.3d 1311 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 5, 2020

While, as explained above, Gevity and its clients could not both qualify as the “employer” under § 3401(d), the fact that the agreements envisioned a co-employment relationship is relevant. … The parties’ dealings as they implemented their arrangement, however, establish that Gevity in practice placed its own funds at risk in making wage payments.

Willis v. Conopco, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 25, 1997

She definitely has immune system abnormalities and I think, she should stop working at this [ ] plant. There is nowhere within that building that she would be safe.... … Reassignment to another position is a required accommodation only if there is a vacant position available for which the employee is otherwise qualified. 42 U.S.C. § 12111(9)(B).

In Re Birmingham Reverse Discrimination Employment Litigation. James A. Bennett, Floyd E. Click James D. Morgan Joel Alan Day Gene E. Northington Vincent Joseph Vella and Lane L. Denard, Cross v. Richard Arrington, Jr., as Mayor of the City of Birmingham City of Birmingham James B. Johnson Henry P. Johnston and Hiram Y. McKinney as Members of the Jefferson County Personnel Board Joseph W. Curtin, as Director of the Jefferson County Personnel Board and Jefferson County Personnel Board, John W. Martin, Major Florence, Ida McGruder Sam Coar, Eugene Thomas, Charles Howard, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees-Cross United States of America, Defendant-Intervenor-Appellee. Birmingham Association of City Employees, an Unincorporated Labor Association, and Kenneth O. Ware, Gerald L. Johnson Phillip H. Whitley David H. Woodall Danny R. Laughlin Marshall G. Whitson Dudley L. Greenway v. Richard Arrington, Jr., as Mayor of the City of Birmingham City of Birmingham James B. Johnson Henry P. Johnston and Hiram Y. McKinney as Members of the Jefferson County Personnel Board Joseph W. Curtin, as Director of the Jefferson County Personnel Board Jefferson County Personnel Board and the United States of America, John W. Martin, Major Florence, Ida McGruder Sam Coar, Wanda Thomas, Eugene Thomas and Charles Howard, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees, Cross Robert K. Wilks Carlice E. Payne Ronnie J. Chambers John E. Garvich, Jr., James W. Henson Robert Bruce Millsap, Cross United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor, Howard E. Pope, Charles E. Carlin, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellants v. Henry P. Johnston, John W. Martin, Major Florence, Ida McGruder Sam Coar, Eugene Thomas and Charles Howard, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees-Cross Wanda Thomas, Defendant-Intervenor

20 F.3d 1525 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 4, 1994

Instead of setting black fire lieutenant promotions at two times the percentage of black firefighters, the final decree establishes that, each year, 50% of all promotions to lieutenant in the BFRS will be filled by qualified … We review the district court's factual findings under the clearly erroneous standard. Newell v. Prudential Ins. Co., 904 F.2d 644, 649 (11th Cir.1990).

Thomas T. Tunstall v. Kelley O. Edwards

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 24, 2023

The District Court Correctly Ruled that Edwards was Entitled to Qualified Immunity on Tunstall’s remaining § 1983 Claims. … To meet this burden, the plaintiff must demonstrate “that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Id.

Joanne Cooper v. John Rutherford

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 29, 2020

The district court granted qualified immunity in favor of the individual officers, with the exception of Officer Black, who had fired 24 shots. … Cooper and her son, we ruled that (a) pre-existing law did not “clearly establish that [Ms.

United States v. Geno Pasquale Raffone, United States of America v. Thomas Ralph Farese

693 F.2d 1343 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 20, 1982

Specifically, appellants ask this court to analogize to the principle that the corpus delicti of a crime may not be established solely by the uncorroborated confession of an accused. See Wong Sun v. … The record of the case at bar reveals a number of overt acts which would qualify as predicate offenses under § 848 and which involved persons acquitted under, or not named in, Counts One through Four.

Charles Kibaara Nyaga, Doin Kainyu Kibaara v. Joh Ashcroft, Rosemary Melville

323 F.3d 906 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 5, 2003

and Naturalization Service (INS)— appeal from the district court’s order granting mandamus relief to the Plaintiffs, Charles Kibaara Nyaga (Nyaga) and his wife, Doin Kainyu Kibarra (Kibarra). 1 Nyaga, a resident alien, qualified … While neither situation involved the INS’s failure to process a lottery winner's application, this distinction is irrelevant; Congress's action clearly evinces its understanding that an applicant is no longer eligible to