Case law

Corines v. Broward County Sheriff's Department

326 F. App'x 493 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 14, 2009

The officers asserted the defense of qualified immunity and argued that they had probable cause and, in the alternative, arguable probable cause, to arrest Corines. … denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity.’”

Walker v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

650 F.3d 1392 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 22, 2011

Yet, the question should be answered by the court as a matter of law “in plain and undisputed cases,” id. at 17–18, that is, in cases where “the evidence shows clearly and palpably that the jury could reasonably draw but … This, however, clearly would have been an unreasonable expectation to foist on Defendants given that there is no evidence even suggesting that the locking system was intended to function in that manner and, in turn, no reason

Auto Cargo, Inc. v. Miami Dade County

237 F.3d 1289 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 8, 2001

Although the facts in this case are different, the framework established in Michelin for assessing the constitutionality of an exaction under the Import-Export Clause is clearly a general one and not restricted simply … The cases Auto Cargo cites to involve challenges under the Commerce Clause, the Export Clause, and the implied immunity of state governments from federal taxation.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eddie CASTLEBERRY, Defendant-Appellant

116 F.3d 1384 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 25, 1997

Thus, the authenticity of the entries was clearly established. … As we have previously stated: Before admitting a coeonspirator’s statement over an objection that the statement does not qualify under Rule 801(d)(2)(E), a district court must be satisfied that the party offering the testimony

Frederick Brown v. George Smith

187 F. App'x 947 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 30, 2006

right; (3) if so, we must inquire whether the asserted right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” … Ed. 2d 272 (2001) (“If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.”). We disagree.

Holly v. Clairson Industries, L.L.C.

492 F.3d 1247 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 19, 2007

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADA, a plaintiff must show: (1) he is disabled; (2) he is a qualified individual; and (3) he was subjected to unlawful discrimination because of his disability … established policies.”

Auto Cargo, Inc. v. Miami Dade County

237 F.3d 1289 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 8, 2001

Although the facts in this case are different, the framework established in Michelin for assessing the constitutionality of an exaction under the Import-Export Clause is clearly a general one and not restricted simply to … The cases Auto Cargo cites to involve challenges under the Commerce Clause, the Export Clause, and the implied immunity of state governments from federal taxation.

Charlotte Moore v. Gwinnett County

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 4, 2020

“Once discretionary authority is established, the burden then shifts to the plaintiff to show that qualified immunity should not apply.” Lewis v. City of W. Palm Beach, 561 F.3d 1288, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009). … a constitutional right, and (2) [the] right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

United States v. Lewis

115 F.3d 1531 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 26, 1997

The court clearly informed the defendant that he was facing a maximum of up to life in prison. The defendant said he understood. … The factors cited, however, are clearly "encouraged" factors under the Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. §§ 2A3.1, 5K2.8.

Walker Chandler v. Georgia Public Telecommunications Commission

917 F.2d 486 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 31, 1990

By not allowing either of the Libertarians to present their opinions with the other ballot-qualified candidates, the state of Georgia is clearly limiting the number of people who will be exposed to the Libertarians' views … The state of Georgia has established an objectively neutral method of qualifying for the ballot--in this case, the Libertarians won at least 29,414 votes in the last statewide election.

United States v. Balmy Lincoln Joseph

978 F.3d 1251 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 27, 2020

The government explained that Joseph clearly was engaging in identity theft and tax fraud for many years. … A proponent may establish the requirements of Rule 803(6) through “the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness.” Fed. R. Evid. 803(6)(D).

United States v. Meier Jason Brown

441 F.3d 1330 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 13, 2006

Defendant clearly understood this explanation, as demonstrated by both his words and actions. … been qualified to determine his guilt or innocence.

Sylvia HAYES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SHELBY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, Defendant-Appellant

726 F.2d 1543 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 16, 1984

The employer need not prove the existence of a general consensus on the points within the qualified scientific community. Id. at 1191. … Those findings are supported by ample evidence, and thus are not clearly erroneous.

Jefferson County Board of Education v. Breen

853 F.2d 853 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 29, 1988

In order to qualify for federal assistance the agency must “[have] in effect a policy that assures all handicapped 1 children the right to a free appropriate public education.” 20 U.S.C. § 1412 (1) (1982) (emphasis added) … The Board has failed, however, to convince us that this finding is clearly erroneous.

Arrington v. Cobb County

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 24, 1998

to establish a prima facie case. … Today, however, Howard clearly represents the law in this circuit, see Combs, 106 F.3d at 1529-35 (collecting cases), as the author of Isenbergh has subsequently acknowledged, see Evans v.

In re: Gary Ray Bowles

935 F.3d 1210 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 22, 2019

"While an intervening decision of the Supreme Court can overrule the decision of a prior panel of our court, the Supreme Court decision must be clearly on point." Garrett v. … The Supreme Court's decision in Montgomery was not "clearly on point" as to the retroactivity of its decision in Hall .

United States v. Charles Phillip Elliott, William Melhorn

62 F.3d 1304 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 31, 1995

Definition of “Investment Advisers” We first decide the threshold issue of whether Elliott and Melhorn qualify as investment advisers for the purposes of the Investment Advisers Act. … They cite not only the lack of a clearly identified investment advisory fee, but also lack of an investment adviser contract as proof that no such relationship existed.

United States v. Williams

340 F.3d 1231 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 5, 2003

. § 1951(a) (establishing penalties for “[w]hoever . . . attempts . . . … to the district court’s first-hand experience trying the case, and (2) whether the issue primarily involves a legal interpretation of a guideline (suggesting de novo review), or instead involves the application of a clearly-established

Philmore v. McNeil

575 F.3d 1251 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 23, 2009

No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214 (1996), Philmore must show that the state court decision adjudicating his claims (1) was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court precedents, or … Maher, Garland clearly considered this alternative and rejected it.” Id. at 587 . Besides failing to establish any deficiency, Philmore also failed to establish any prejudice. See id.

Christopher Barbour v. Michael Haley

471 F.3d 1222 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 8, 2006

It is now clearly established that prisoners have a constitutional right of access to the courts. Bounds, 430 U.S. at 821, 97 S. Ct. at 1494. … In sum, Finley, Giarratano, and Coleman clearly establish that death- sentenced inmates have no federal constitutional right to postconviction counsel.