Case law

United States v. Corbin

734 F.2d 643 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 18, 1984

The prejudice flowing from a joint trial must be “clearly beyond the curative powers of a cautionary instruction.” United States v. Becker, 569 F.2d 951, 964 (5th Cir.1978). … Stewart if he had shot one Herbert Patterson in January of 1980, and whether his “deal” with the government would immunize him from prosecution in connection with such an incident.

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.

Gholston v. Housing Authority Of The City Of Montgomery

818 F.2d 776 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 22, 1987

It is undisputed in this case that the Montgomery Housing Authority had an absolute preference for higher-income tenants over applicants who qualified for the foregoing three statutory preferences. … Thus, the district court's conclusion that the appellants failed to meet their burden of proof is not clearly erroneous. 1 See 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1437d(c)(4)(A) (1982 & Supp.

Bruce Henry v. Sheriff of Tuscaloosa County, Alabama

135 F.4th 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 23, 2025

As a result, it deprives some individ- uals convicted of qualifying offenses of their fundamental right to establish a home and bring up their own children, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. … In this respect, the Fourteenth Amendment provides that “[n]o State shall make or en- force any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor . . . deprive

The Mead Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board

697 F.2d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 11, 1983

The establishment of such rates will be a matter for negotiation. … Further, this Agreement shall not be amended, changed, altered, or qualified, except by an instrument in writing duly signed by the parties signatory hereto.

United States v. Eddie Milton Garey, Jr., A.K.A. Miles Garey, A.K.A. Milton Garey, A.K.A. Eddie Garey

483 F.3d 1159 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 11, 2007

Osteen [his court-appointed counsel] is qualified to handle my case.” Id. at 376 . Subsequently, the prosecutor said, “Okay. Then I assume your answer is yes, you don’t want Mr. … White, 815 F.2d 1401, 1401 (11th Cir.1987) (concluding a mere hypothetical conflict will not suffice to establish a violation of the Sixth Amendment).

Robert E. Wright v. Amsouth Bancorp.

320 F.3d 1198 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 5, 2003

If he cannot make such a logical deduction, he is wrong in declaring himself qualified for his job. Id. at 4-5. … Because this claim was clearly an allegation of promissory fraud, the burden was on Wright to prove that -- when the promise was made -- AmSouth intended to deceive Wright. Goodyear, 719 So. 2d at 776.

Gregory Jack Almond v. Kevin Walker

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 31, 2023

immunity analysis. … In both cases, it is clearly established that an unreasonable, warrantless search of the home without exigent circumstances violates the Fourth Amendment. See Hartsfield, 50 F.3d at 954–55.

Loranger v. Stierheim

10 F.3d 776 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 4, 1994

The district court dismissed Loranger’s complaint with leave to amend, holding that the defen *779 dants were absolutely immune from suit. Loranger moved to vacate. … The Supreme Court has clearly stated that “[tjhe time that is compensable under § 1988 is that ‘reasonably expended on the litigation.’ ” See Webb v.

R.F.J. v. Bruce Perry

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 7, 2018

Perry and Brady again separately moved to dismiss, contending that qualified immunity shielded them from Plaintiffs’ suit. … Instead, qualified immunity is a right to be free from litigation altogether once the defense is established. See Howe v.

Tefel v. Reno

180 F.3d 1286 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 1999

Kurzban, as lead counsel, was particularly qualified to represent the class. … The stop-time rule clearly furthers this purpose by stopping the accrual of time toward the physical-residence requirement at the commencement of removal proceedings.

Jorge Nieves, Jr. v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 12, 2021

“A state court acts contrary to clearly established federal law if it confronts a set of facts that are materially 4 Because the Fifth DCA affirmed the postconviction court’s decision denying Nieves’s … It was Nieves’s burden to establish that he was prejudiced by counsel’s failure to pursue an evidentiary hearing on the stand-your-ground motion, and it would have been Nieves’s burden to establish his entitlement to immunity

50 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1378, 41 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 36,667 Miriam Grier v. Secretary of the Army Headquarters, United States Army Forces Command, Fort McPherson Georgia Adjutant General, Administrative Services, United States Army Forces Command Officer in Charge, Mail and Distribution Classified Section, United States Army Forces Command and Chief, Civilian Personnel, United States Army Forces Command

799 F.2d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 19, 1986

district court properly treated this as a claim pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA"), 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq., 3 and granted summary judgment for the defendants on that basis. 11 Although plaintiff has never clearly … Arkansas-Best Freight Systems, Inc., 419 U.S. 281, 286 , 95 S.Ct. 438, 442 , 42 L.Ed.2d 447 (1974). 13 Defendants are also entitled to judgment as a matter of law on plaintiff's claim under Sec. 706(2)(D) that established

Michael Perez v. Miami-Dade County

297 F.3d 1255 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 17, 2002

The district court, however, found otherwise, pointing to the certificate of service attached to the request, which is “clearly dated October 3, 1997.” … have still had to be held, thus negating any argument Perez might have had in establishing prejudice. 28 That is, when a party uses the rule to establish uncontested facts

United States v. Bristow

110 F.3d 754 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 18, 1997

innocent possession of a handgun as a convicted felon may constitute superficial arguments for classifying his case as special or unusual with respect to heartland cases, clearly … Under a former version of the Sentencing Guidelines, the Sixth Circuit concluded that possession of a firearm by a convicted felon as collateral for payment owed him did not qualify for departure as "innocent

EEOC v. Total System Services, Inc.

221 F.3d 1171 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 7, 2000

Although a literal interpretation of the provision would not allow for such a claim, Judge Posner reasoned that, were § 2000e-3 held not to apply, "the result would be that employers could obtain immunity … The words "under this subchapter" appear at the end of the participation clause;2 and therefore, the qualifying phrase "under this subchapter" applies only to the immediately preceding clause: the participation clause

Altagracia Banuchi v. City of Homestead

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 7, 2024

For her Fourth Amendment claim, the district court con- cluded that Banuchi met her burden at that stage to show that Green was not entitled to qualified immunity. … whether Banuchi showed that the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the violation because the district court concluded that Green did not violate a constitutional right.

Denzil Earl McKathan v. United States

969 F.3d 1213 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 12, 2020

And at the time the district court remarked on the inevitable-discovery doctrine, it had just ruled on a clearly unmeritorious Fourth Amendment suppression motion (and the Fifth Amendment argument had not been made at that … The district court denied the claim, concluding that he failed to establish prejudice. This appeal followed.

Meek v. Metropolitan Dade County

985 F.2d 1471 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 26, 1993

Expert Analyses Based on Flawed Data The intervenors contend that the district court clearly erred in determining that the hispanic voters established a vote dilution claim. … Under Florida law, these citizen Hispanics are qualified to become voters.

Myra Furcron v. Mail Centers Plus, LLC

843 F.3d 1295 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 16, 2016

The “burden of establishing a prima facie case . . . is not onerous.” Burdine, 450 U.S. at 253. … This does not appear to the Court to qualify as evidence of “evolving rationales” on the part of MCP.