Case law

United States v. Juan Carlos Elso

422 F.3d 1305 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 2, 2005

We find that Elso’s actions of retrieving Andy’s money from a safe in Andy’s home, placing it in his car, and driving away constituted a transfer, and therefore qualified as a “transaction” under the plain language of the … The instructions given were clearly sufficient to enable Elso to argue in defense that he lacked the requisite intent for a conviction.

Litton Industrial Automation Systems, Inc. v. Nationwide Power Corp.

106 F.3d 366 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 24, 1997

The Government has waived its sovereign immunity for interpleader actions involving tax liens in 28 U.S.C. § 2410. … The dispute in this case is whether Highlander's interest qualifies as a security interest as defined by the FTLA. B.

Ronald Keith Spivey v. State Board of Pardons

279 F.3d 1301 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 24, 2002

As indicated above, we are satisfied that the instant claim seeks an immediate stay of the imposition of Spivey's death sentence, and accordingly, is clearly not the type of claim referenced by the Supreme Court in Edwards … In such a posture, Woodard's claims might well qualify as viable § 1983 prospective claims, as mentioned above and in Edwards v. Balisok, an issue we need not decide.

United States v. Marshall

173 F.3d 1312 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 26, 1999

Instead, the defendants' possession of crack cocaine was established largely by Hicks' testimony. The defendants presented a variety of evidence calling Hicks' credibility into question. … In addition, the defendants pointed out that Hicks was granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for his work as an informant; consequently, they argued, he had strong incentives to manufacture evidence for the Government

United States v. Xavier Taylor

818 F.3d 671 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 28, 2016

By including an enhancement for production, the Sentencing Commission clearly did not intend that result. … This far-reaching definition clearly encompasses a wide range of behaviors.

William E. Gustashaw, Jr. v. Commissioner of IRS

696 F.3d 1124 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 28, 2012

A gross valuation misstatement exists if “the value of any 5 Gustashaw additionally argues that his general concession of his underpayment of tax immunizes him from the imposition of gross valuation misstatement … Further, even to the extent that Gable’s statements concerning Brown & Wood’s reputation qualify as advice in the traditional sense, they do not constitute tax advice on which Gustashaw was entitled to rely.

Bridgette Frederick v. Sprint/united Management Company & Sprint Communications Company, L.P.

246 F.3d 1305 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 18, 2001

Frederick attested that she was qualified for the promotion and that it should have been granted, automatically; however, Moore denied her request, telling her that she “needed to do more things.” … At summary judgment, the only evidence Frederick offered on this point was her own testimony that she was qualified for the Coordinator II position and was denied the promotion.

United States v. Harry W. Snyder, Jr.

291 F.3d 1291 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 21, 2002

Many of the comments referenced by the defendants are clearly innocuous. … Brown, 53 F.3d 312 , 314 n. 3 (11th Cir.1995), we hold "a reasonable fact finder could conclude that the evidence established the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v.

Albert Holland, Jr. v. State of FLorida

775 F.3d 1294 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 29, 2014

Ct. at 1702 & n.2 (stating that only Supreme Court holdings, and not dicta or holdings of lower courts, constitute clearly established law). … Edwards provides an authoritative statement from the Supreme Court about what its earlier cases did and did not clearly establish. Indiana v.

Ward v. RETIREMENT BD. OF NFL PLAYER RETIRE. PLAN

643 F.3d 1331 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 2011

That clearly prohibits the disability benefits in this case from being subject to the specific performance (“other legal process”) awarded to the Ward Firm in the state court judgments. … See 29 U.S.C. § 1102(a)(1) (“Every employee benefit plan shall be 7 established and maintained pursuant to a written instrument.”); Hunt v.

United States v. Alvin Smith

459 F.3d 1276 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 18, 2005

The rule in the qualified immunity context is that “[f]or a constitutional right to be clearly established, its contours must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates … This principle is well-established.

Cotton v. U.S. Pipe & Foundry Co.

856 F.2d 158 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 30, 1988

Appellants’ arguments were often difficult to discern and clearly untenable. Any attack on the original consent decree was precluded by Cotton v. Hinton. … This claim was also clearly precluded under existing law in this Circuit. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED with respect to Cotton and Herrod.

Jared S. Fox v. Robert Graff

276 F. App'x 936 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 6, 2008

“Qualified immunity offers complete protection for government officials sued in their individual capacities as long as their conduct violates no clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … “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

Hollis B. Barron v. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlant

129 F. App'x 512 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 19, 2005

In a circumstantial evidence case, “[t]o establish a prima facie case of discriminatory failure to promote, a plaintiff [generally] must prove: (1) that he is a member of a protected class; (2) that he was qualified for … As the district court explained, Barron’s shot gun complaint did not clearly indicate what role any individuals within FRBA would have had in the alleged discrimination.

C.B. Ex Rel. Breeding v. Driscoll

82 F.3d 383 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 18, 1996

We hold that the search of a student in the instant circumstances does not violate the Fourth Amendment, and therefore we need not consider issues of qualified immunity and of local government liability. … In any event, CB clearly received all the process that was due.

United States v. Clarence Clay

376 F.3d 1296 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 15, 2004

This court “must uphold the jury’s verdict whenever a reasonable 7 factfinder could conclude that the evidence establishes guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” … The government also contends that Clay qualifies for the firearm enhancement because (1) the conspiracy involved a significant amount of drugs; (2) during the conspiracy, Clay repeatedly picked up drugs from the French

Michael W. Bass v. Board of County Commissioners

256 F.3d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 9, 2001

In order to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination under Title VII, the plaintiff must show that: (1) he was qualified and applied for the position; (2) he was rejected despite his qualifications; and (3) other … in favor of another less qualified employee of a different race.

United States v. Craig Stanley Toll

804 F.3d 1344 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 3, 2015

Those statements were also the ones presented to the board, and Toll did not qualify his representations that InnoVida was profitable. … Third, sufficient evidence established that Toll knew the two purported contracts were false.

Lilburn J. Nunnelee, II v. David Morgan

550 F. App'x 716 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 17, 2013

immunity is an issue of fact, but that argument is irrelevant because the district court did not dismiss Nunnelee’s retaliation claim on the basis of qualified immunity. … This link can be established when a history of abuse puts the supervisor on notice of deprivations and the supervisor fails to correct them, when improper custom or policy breed indifference to constitutional rights, or

GeorgiaCarry.Org, Inc. v. The State of Georgia

687 F.3d 1244 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 20, 2012

Ed. 2d 67 (1984) (“This Court’s decisions thus establish that ‘an unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal courts by her own citizens as well as by citizens of another state.’” (quoting Employees v. … The Court then establishes that this religious belief is sincerely held. Id.