Case law

Jerome Julius Weeks v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 22, 2019

Two of his prior convictions qualified as drug trafficking offenses. … The Government did not introduce Shepard documents at sentencing and the sentencing court did not clearly indicate whether Mr.

United States v. Stanley Wintfield Rolle

65 F.4th 1273 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 14, 2023

Cir. 2004) (“This contextual feature of § 1324(a) establishes that it is fundamentally international, not simply domestic, in focus and effect.”). … The government asserts—and Rolle does not dispute—that Rolle’s attempt to bring aliens to the United States and his conspiracy to encourage aliens to come to the United States clearly violate our

Marbel Mendoza v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

761 F.3d 1213 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 31, 2014

The phrase “clearly established Federal law” refers “to the holdings, as opposed to the dicta, of [the U.S. Supreme Court’s] decisions as of the time of the relevant state-court decision.” Williams v. … “[I]t 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 U.S. Supreme Court].” Knowles v.

Lopez v. First Union National Bank

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 21, 1997

As we have recently had occasion to explain, when used in a statute, "the adjective "any' is not ambiguous; it has a well-established meaning." Merritt v. Dillard Paper Company, 120 F.3d 1181, 1186 (11th Cir.1997). … Clearly, a disclosure in response to a seizure warrant is protected by the third safe harbor.

Jacksonville Branch, Naacp, Cross-Appellee v. The Duval County School Board, a Body Corporate, Cross-Appellant

883 F.2d 945 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 23, 1989

Students attending other schools who qualify for the program are transported to schools with gifted centers. The process by which a student qualifies for the gifted program involves several steps. … The district’s qualifying scores on the first two tests, for example, are higher than the state’s.

ECB USA, Inc. v. Chubb Insurance Company of New Jersey

109 F.4th 1367 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 1, 2024

First, the relevant phrase here involves none of the parts of speech to which the last-antecedent canon is most clearly useful. … Certainly, the presence of a comma before “for financial in- stitutions” would establish with more certainty that it applies across every term in the list.

United States Securities & Exchange Commission v. Carrillo

115 F.3d 1540 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 30, 1997

Immunities Act). … Federal Republic of Nigeria, 647 F.2d 300, 314 (2d Cir.1981) (Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act); see also 4 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R.

United States v. Adams

799 F.2d 665 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 15, 1986

The record clearly indicates that the prosecutrix was not referring to the defendants. … We agree with Elliott that "mere presence" is insufficient to establish guilt on these charges.

United States v. Mateos

623 F.3d 1350 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 19, 2010

that her patients did not qualify for WinRho treatments; she was present when patients at St. … complications, and that the risk is especially high when the patients have HIV and weakened immune systems.

Fioretti v. Massachusetts General Life Insurance

53 F.3d 1228 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 7, 1995

This distinction clearly has little, if any, application in the present case. … Although the record indicates that Anthony Fioretti paid all his premiums in accordance with the timetable established by the policy, it does not indicate when (or where) these payments were made. .

Mary McCall v. Otis R. Bowen, M.D. Secretary of Health and Human Services

846 F.2d 1317 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 13, 1988

Under the application of the proper standard established by the precedents of this Court, the Secretary may deny SSI disability benefits only when a claimant, without good reason, fails to follow a prescribed course of treatment … Admittedly, plaintiff’s physicians advised her to lose weight, and the record clearly indicates her condition would improve if she did so, but no evidence has been presented suggesting that plaintiff has refused to follow

Laquan Johnson v. Elaine Terry

112 F.4th 995 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 12, 2024

Layne, 526 U.S. 603, 609, 618 (1999) (implicitly assuming that a Bivens remedy was available for the plaintiff’s Fourth Amend- ment claim but holding that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity … Howards, 566 U.S. 658, 663 n.4 (2012) (same, except reversing the denial of summary judgment for the defendants on qualified immunity grounds); Ashcroft v.

United States v. Donald Edward Miles

290 F.3d 1341 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 10, 2002

. § 5861(d) qualified as a violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)). … The Supreme Court established in Almendarez-Torres v.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Exel, Inc.

884 F.3d 1326 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 16, 2018

And the evidence conclusively established that PTP candidates who were minimally qualified transferred directly into their new jobs without competing against other interested, non-PTP applicants. … might be more qualified.

Mustafa Nasir Saleem, in Behalf of Himself and Other Black Muslims of the Nation of Islam v. David C. Evans

866 F.2d 1313 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 27, 1989

This court has held that First Amendment claims involving state interference with or establishment of religion should not be dismissed without a hearing inquiring into the sincerity of the plaintiff’s alleged religious beliefs … The district court, however, granted the prison officials qualified immunity from damages. This court has affirmed that ruling on appeal. Diaab v.

Rafael Fernandez Garcia v. United States

984 F.3d 1367 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 8, 2021

His indictment alleged multiple predicate offenses for the § 924(o) charge, and Davis establishes that one of those offenses is not a crime of violence. … “Where, as here, the evidence does not clearly explain what happened . . . the party with the burden loses.” Beeman, 871 F.3d at 1225 (quoting Romine v. Head, 253 F.3d 1349, 1357 (11th Cir. 2001)).

United States v. Harold Haimowitz, Dan Scarborough, George L. Onett

725 F.2d 1561 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 5, 1984

The district court’s finding is a factual determination that is reversible only if shown to have been clearly erroneous. United States v. … Upon review of the record, we cannot say that the court clearly erred in admitting the statements. *1583 V.

Dolphin LLC v. WCI Communities, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 1, 2013

applicability Any contract or agreement which is for the sale or lease of a lot not exempt under section 1702 of this title and which does not provide— (1) a description of the lot which makes such lot clearly … If the number of units offered by these two developments were counted together, One Singer Island would not qualify for an ILSFDA exemption.

Razvan Rusovici v. Marcy Verduin

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 2, 2024

And to overcome qualified immunity for his claim against Verduin in her individual capacity, Rusovici must have: (1) alleged facts that establish that Verduin “violated his constitutional rights; and … (2) show[n] that the right involved was clearly estab- lished at the time of the putative misconduct.”

Heather Olson v. Jason Whitfield

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 12, 2018

Olson’s version of the facts, she has alleged a clearly- established constitutional violation on these claims, and we therefore affirm the ruling of the District Court.1 I. … Olson’s arrest, “our binding precedent clearly established . . . that an arrest made without arguable probable cause violates the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures.” See Skop v.