Case law

Waling Choizilme v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 30, 2018

Stat. 893.101(2) (establishing affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of illicit nature). … § 844(a), clearly fall within the definitions used by congress in . . . § 1101(a)(43)(B) and § 924(c)(2)”).

Vareka Investments, N v. a Netherlands Antilles Corp. v. American Investment Properties, Inc., a Florida Corp.

724 F.2d 907 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 21, 1984

The State of Florida granted the application, and Vareka became qualified to transact business in Florida. … Vareka qualified to do business in Florida and appointed a resident agent in Miami, Florida. All payments were to be sent to a Miami address.

Roger Reeves v. DSI Security Services

331 F. App'x 659 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 3, 2009

The Supreme Court has ruled sovereign immunity shields federal agencies from suit unless that agency waived sovereign immunity. Dep’t of the Army v. Blue Fox, Inc., 119 S. … Therefore, Reeves failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.

David E. Moore, an Individual v. Sun Bank of North Florida, N.A. A Florida Corporation

923 F.2d 1423 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 25, 1991

School Board, 14 we would be “acting beyond our authority to read into section 504 limitations which Congress chose not to *1428 establish when it clearly could have done so.” 15 The question, in Arline, was whether “Federal … In view of the long established exemption of contracts of insurance or guaranty under title VI, we think it unlikely that Congress intended section 504 to apply to such contracts. 29 While it is true that courts generally

Davis v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated

516 F.3d 955 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 6, 2008

CCBCC hires someone – a union member or a person from outside the company – to fill a management position that is clearly non-union. … P. 54(b) would qualify as a final judgment under § 1291, but the court was not asked to and did not enter a Rule 54(b) judgment in this case.

Christina Paylan, M.D. v. Scott Teitelbaum

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 7, 2020

If so, we then ask whether the right was clearly established at the time of the violation. Id. If the answer to either question is in the negative, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. … She has not overcome Teitelbaum’s qualified immunity because there is no evidence showing that Teitelbaum violated any federal right, clearly established or otherwise. 2.

Engineering Contractors Association Of South Florida Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County

122 F.3d 895 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 8, 1997

Specifically, the programs establish preferences for construction enterprises owned and controlled by blacks, Hispanics, or women. … As we explained in Ensley Branch, "[c]ertain aspects of this inquiry are well established." 31 F.3d at 1565 .

Ulysses Jerome Johnson v. Walter A. McNeil

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 7, 2009

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff must satisfy a two prong test; he must show that: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation

Rickey Shew v. William Horvath

712 F. App'x 949 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 4, 2017

legal question of whether Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity under that version of the facts.” … Officers “enjoy a qualified immunity from suit that protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

O.P. Hollis v. J.O. Davis and the Attorney General of the State of Alabama, Court of Appeals, Bullock County, Criminal Courts, Union Springs

912 F.2d 1343 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 25, 1990

This ineffective assistance establishes cause for the procedural default. 7 While Mr. … A mixed-race jury might clearly have a special perception in a mixed race case. His defense was consent. His jury was all white.

Carter v. Three Springs Residential

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 6, 1998

Even if Carter was minimally qualified for the position, Three Springs argues that he was less qualified than Haynes for the job. … Furthermore, the following experiences of Three Springs employees are clearly legally relevant to the issue of pretext.

Jacks v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration

688 F. App'x 814 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 23, 2017

The ALJ must clearly articulate the weight given to different medical opinions and the reasons for doing so. Winschel, 631 F.3d at 1179 . Here, the ALJ incorrectly stated that Dr. … However, Jacks’s argument does not meet any exception to our well-established rule that issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered. See Access Now, Inc. v. Sw.

Gonzalez v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

629 F.3d 1219 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 3, 2011

AEDPA”), we may grant habeas relief to a state prisoner on any claim adjudicated on the merits in state court if that adjudication “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly … And the evidence properly admitted at trial—including Gonzalez’s own confession, in which he admitted to shooting the victim—established his participation in the robbery.

Toney THOMAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee

764 F.2d 768 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 1, 1985

Then plaintiff filed a discrimination charge with the Florida Human Relations Commission (FHRC), which qualifies as a state agency “with authority to grant relief,” making Florida what is referred to as a “deferral” state … Although the Florida claim was clearly untimely under Florida law, the record does not reflect the reason for the FHRC’s decision not to act on plaintiff’s charge.

Carter v. Three Springs Residential

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 6, 1998

Even if Carter was minimally qualified for the position, Three Springs argues that he was less qualified than Haynes for the job. … Furthermore, the following experiences of Three Springs employees are clearly legally relevant to the issue of pretext.

J. D. Nettles, Jr. v. City of Leesburg

415 F. App'x 116 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 22, 2010

However, as this Court explained in Randall, a heightened pleading standard for § 1983 cases involving qualified immunity was overruled by the Supreme Court in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (2009). … “‘Rule 38 sanctions have been imposed against appellants who raise ‘clearly frivolous claims’ in the face of established law and clear facts.’” Farese v.

United States v. Marcus Raqual Williams

435 F.3d 1350 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 13, 2006

The court specifically acknowledged that under our precedent in Gilbert, Williams qualified for the § 4B1.1 career offender enhancement and applied that enhancement. … The principles established from these cases are that when reviewing for reasonableness we must consider both the § 3553(a) factors and the reasons given by the district court.

Sheena Yarbrough v. Decatur Housing Authority

941 F.3d 1022 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 29, 2019

BACKGROUND Sheena Yarbrough was a qualified participant in the Section 8 Housing Assistance program operated by the Decatur Housing Authority under the administration of the Department of Housing and Urban Development … Although this standard “differs from the ‘weight of evidence’ or ‘clearly erroneous’ standards frequently applied by appellate courts in their review of trial court determinations of fact, like them it contemplates review

De Cuellar v. Brady

881 F.2d 1561 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 1, 1989

In Real , the Secretary blocked an account which had been established by the decedent, a Cuban national. … We do not here hold that the sinking fund does not qualify as a trust as a matter of law.

United States v. Naomi Maitre

898 F.3d 1151 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 7, 2018

Smith” is not clearly erroneous. Ms. Maitre also challenges the District Court’s loss calculation. … Neither was there error in including driver’s licenses as those also qualify as “access devices.” See 18 U.S.C. § 1029(e)(1).