Case law

United States v. Leonardo Mendoza-Cecelia, Terry Lee Greenberg, Hector Favio Marin-Hernandez

963 F.2d 1467 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 24, 1992

Having indicated a “possible desire” for an attorney, see id., Greenberg made a qualifying equivocal indication. … Note 2 also states that qualifying predicate offenses include attempted crimes of violence. See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1, Application Note 2.

Matthew John Hylton v. U.S. Attorney General

992 F.3d 1154 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2021

Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, his convictions for armed bank robbery and for unlawful transfer of a firearm both qualify as aggravated felonies. See id. … At the first step of Chevron, we evaluate whether Congress has written clearly. Barton v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 904 F.3d 1294, 1298 (11th Cir. 2018).

Weeks v. Jones

100 F.3d 124 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 22, 1996

"On its face, this statute grants indigent capital defendants a mandatory right to qualified legal counsel ... "[i]n any [federal] post conviction proceeding.' "7 McFarland v. … "Factual allegations are frivolous for purpose of § 1915(d) when they are "clearly baseless;' legal theories are frivolous when they are "indisputably meritless.' " Battle v.

Arthur Quiller, Lillie Mae Quiller, and All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Barclays American/credit, Inc.

764 F.2d 1400 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 8, 1985

Given that the court concedes that the qualifying clause informs the debtor that he may have a right to cure, that is all that is necessary. … Ill Once the “terms and conditions” are established, then the relief a party is entitled to obtain in court is to have the contract enforced according to those “terms and conditions.”

Ellis Wayne Felker v. Tony Turpin, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center

83 F.3d 1303 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 2, 1996

Whitaker is a qualified pathologist. … But the record clearly shows that Dr. Whitaker, who was unquestionably qualified to give such an opinion, also testified to the same opinion as Tillman.

Liao v. Tennessee Valley Authority

867 F.2d 1366 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 16, 1989

woman could be hired in preference to perhaps a marginally better qualified white male, violated the strictures of Title VII. … Bock was not as qualified as Liao, she argues, the district court also rejected the TVA's justification as pretextual.

Richard Knight v. Florida Department of Corrections

936 F.3d 1322 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 30, 2019

And as the Supreme Court has explained, “clearly established” federal law means “the holdings, as opposed to the dicta” from its controlling precedents at the time of the relevant state court decision. Lockyer v. … Strickland is the relevant “clearly established” Supreme Court precedent for purposes of an ineffective-assistance claim. See Premo v. Moore, 562 U.S. 115, 118 (2011).

Louis Napier v. Karen J. Preslicka

314 F.3d 528 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 10, 2002

The court stated: The language we have quoted from the Miller decision establishes that “brought” as used in section 1997e(a)’s “No action shall be brought ...” language means filed. … under the PLRA from bring suit while thus imprisoned unless he alleged physical injury.” .I believe that if Congress had intended this one provision at Section 1997e (e) to depart from the overall scheme, it would have clearly

Pankajkumar Patel v. U.S. Attorney General

971 F.3d 1258 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 19, 2020

exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative.” … The government bears the burden of proving removability by clear and convincing evidence, while the applicant bears the burden of establishing admissibility clearly and beyond doubt. Id.

Jonathan Hughes v. Coconut Creek Police Dept.

233 F. App'x 919 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 23, 2007

Qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from civil liability if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.” Id.

American Red Cross v. Palm Beach Blood Bank, Inc.

143 F.3d 1407 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 16, 1998

We will not disturb the district court's factual determinations unless they are clearly erroneous. See id. at 599. A. … Information that is generally known or readily accessible to third parties cannot qualify for trade secret protection. See Bestechnologies, Inc. v. Trident Envtl.

United States v. Xavier Brooks

112 F.4th 937 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 9, 2024

First, Shepard documents establish that, in 2008, Brooks was convicted of robbery by force. O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40(a)(1). … Second, he argues that the district court clearly erred by concluding that he received a stolen firearm.

Gray v. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Co.

125 F.3d 1371 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 24, 1997

According to Lockheed, the Supreme Court also has not clearly recognized a "general maritime right of survival." … The above-described defects clearly demonstrate that the servo did not conform to its specifications.

Goldstein v. Manhattan Industries, Inc.

758 F.2d 1435 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 25, 1985

There was considerable evidence that the demoted employee was not qualified for the position from which he had been demoted. … Moreover, the evidence is overwhelming that Goldstein was highly qualified for his position.

Doe v. Chiles

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 26, 1998

In so doing, 10 Clearly, the appellees have “identif[ied] with particularity the right[] they claim[].” Blessing, 117 S. … The Supreme Court has not limited its application of sovereign immunity to the suits described in the text of the Eleventh Amendment.

Socialist Workers Party v. Leahy

145 F.3d 1240 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 7, 1998

For example, only qualifying candidates of registered parties and qualifying independent candidates may appear on the ballot. See Section 99.096, Fla. Stat. … Moreover, plaintiff-appellants' desired relief, a finding that the statute is unconstitutional and an injunction against its enforcement, would clearly redress the threatened injury by preventing it.

United States v. Fausto Aguero Alvarado

808 F.3d 474 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 11, 2015

Because Defendant had presented no evidence of “any direct or implied affirmative representation sufficient to establish the defense[] of public authority,” and no evidence to establish the reasonableness of his alleged … As the only evidence supporting a claim of honest belief was Defendant’s testimony, the jury clearly did not buy his story. See United States v.

McKEE v. SULLIVAN

903 F.2d 1436 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 1990

(CCH) p 15,850 (S.D.Fla.1984) (probate court record of death is clearly "other convincing evidence" under 20 C.F.R. Sec. 404.720(c)); Hizer v. Harris, Unempl.Ins.Rep. … (evidence of death in fact required by 404.720(c) and probate court order does not qualify); Miller v. Richardson, 321 F.Supp. 157, 158 (W.D.Pa.1970) (stating in dicta that 20 C.F.R.

Williams v. City of Dothan, Alabama

745 F.2d 1406 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 5, 1984

Although some of those who would qualify for membership in the class may have failed to protest the assessments, many others did so persistently and vigorously from the time the maximum assessments were first announced. … While we express no opinion as to the merits of their claim, we believe that a disputed factual question is clearly present here and summary judgment is therefore inappropriate. 9 III.

United States v. Pielago

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 17, 1998

However, to the extent that Tantalo establishes a per se rule1, we disagree with it. … In this case, paragraph four should be read as qualifying, instead of contradicting, paragraph three.