Case law

The Indigo Room, Inc. v. City of Fort Myers

589 F. App'x 938 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 16, 2014

Baker and Gagnon raised the defense of qualified immunity. … immunity.

United States v. Jeffrey Jason Cooper

926 F.3d 718 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 10, 2019

The term “related acts” is clearly limited to illegal acts associated with prostitution. The district court did not err in including the “related act” language. … The Immunized-Witness Instruction Cooper asked the district court to instruct the jury to “consider some witnesses’ testimony with more caution,” including “witnesses who have been promised immunity from prosecution

Candace J. Thomas v. Albany Area Primary Healthcare Inc.

972 F.3d 1195 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 25, 2020

Tolliver’s treatment of Darius did not qualify for federal liability protections under the FTCA because Dr. … It would also run afoul of Supreme Court precedent that has “relentlessly repeated that any remand order issued on the grounds specified in § 1447(c) is immunized from all forms of appellate review, whether or not that

Robinson Antonio Marti-Xiques v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

713 F.2d 1511 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 9, 1983

In some cases, as in Vargas-Gonzalez , the appellant has clearly established a prima facie case and we may remand. … In others, the appellant will just as clearly have failed to establish a prima facie case, and we may affirm. Other cases, such as the one at bar, fall between these two extremes.

William Greg Thomas v. Attorney General, State of Florida

992 F.3d 1162 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2021

The district court denied this claim below, finding that “the state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established … of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented.”

Gerald Mastaw v. West Florida Medical Center Clinic, PA

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 23, 2023

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADA, a plaintiff must show that he: (1) was disabled; (2) was a qualified individual; (3) was discriminated against because of his disability … If the defendant establishes the ex- istence of a qualified privilege, the plaintiff must demonstrate “ex- press malice,” or that “the primary motive for the statement is shown to have been an intention

United States v. Robert Irving Eyster, A/K/A Bobby, Jack Leroy Marshall

948 F.2d 1196 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 17, 1991

Abbott and Clark soon obtained immunity from prosecution in exchange for information on their activities and their cooperation in obtaining further evidence. … The first photograph, Government Exhibit 7-B, clearly shows the torso of a burned body with an arm extending over a faceless head.

Stay, Inc. v. Cheney

940 F.2d 1457 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 4, 1991

. § 253b(c), awarded the contract to AMPB as the lowest qualified bidder. … The Choctaw court found that the contracting officer had “clearly violated the applicable procure *1463 ment regulations; ...

Maritime Management v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 1, 2001

Unlike § 2412(b), which is not limited in this respect, § 2412(d) requires parties to qualify under statutorily prescribed net worth maximums. See 28 U.S.C. … Because the EAJA is a waiver of sovereign immunity and as such must be strictly construed, Haitian Refugee Center v.

Roland L. Walker v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

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

O'Connor v. PCA Family Health Plan, Inc.

200 F.3d 1349 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 18, 2000

Sara Lee Corp., 118 F.3d 1151, 1157 (7th Cir.1997) (holding an employer may terminate an employee on FMLA leave as part of a RIF), because United States Department of Labor regulation qualifies the right. … The record testimony surrounding this issue is ambiguous at best, so we are unable to conclude the district court clearly erred in finding this fact.

Medberry v. Butler

185 F.3d 1189 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 23, 1999

We agree with both the Fifth and the Eighth Circuits that the clear language of § 1915(g) establishes that the Third Circuit's approach is incorrect. … As such, Medberry may not proceed in forma pauperis because he has "three strikes" against him under § 1915(g) and because he has failed to qualify under the statute's imminent danger exception.2 Finally, contrary

Hassan Mohamed Farah v. Michael W. Meade

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2021

To qualify for protection under the Convention Against Torture, an alien must establish that he will more likely than not be tortured if removed to his country. 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2); Reyes-Sanchez v. U.S. … Our previous opinions offer some direction as to what evidence qualifies as highly relevant. In Min Yong Huang v.

Aaron Private Clinic Management LLC v. Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Community Health

912 F.3d 1330 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 4, 2019

Aaron asserts that it sues on its own behalf and “on behalf of its prospective patients who are opiate-addicted, who are qualified disabled under the [Americans with Disabilities Act], and who are prospective patients … To satisfy its burden at the pleading stage, a plaintiff must “clearly allege facts demonstrating each element,” Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S.

United States v. Douglas

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 21, 1995

The EAJA clearly applies to protect successful third-party intervenors in civil forfeiture proceedings. See, e.g., United States v. Certain Real Estate Property Located at 4880 S.E. … nexus between property and criminal offense established in criminal prosecution by showing "that a particular asset was not forfeitable [to begin with] under the terms of the statute").

Royal Typewriter Company, a Division of Litton Business Systems, Inc., a Corporation v. Xerographic Supplies Corporation, a Corporation

719 F.2d 1092 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 14, 1983

Appellees failed to establish lost profits with the requisite certainty at trial. … The trial judge’s instruction was clearly erroneous. We, therefore, remand the determination of liability on Royal’s claim for a new trial. X.

Bruce Jacobs v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.

113 F.4th 1294 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 26, 2024

Under that standard, the blogs at issue here are just as clearly “news media” as the company websites we addressed in Osheroff. … In short, we conclude that the blog articles “qualify as news media” under the FCA’s public disclosure bar and had been “pub- licly disclosed” before Jacobs’s suit.

AA Suncoast Chiropractic Clinic, P.A. v. Progressive American Insurance Company

938 F.3d 1170 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 12, 2019

The party seeking class certification bears the burden to establish its propriety. Id. at 1265. III. A. … Every class must be “adequately defined and clearly ascertainable.” Little v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 691 F.3d 1302, 1304 (11th Cir. 2012) (citation omitted).

Kennedy v. Tallant

710 F.2d 711 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 28, 1983

Of course, each of the class members must have received at least one prospectus in order to qualify as a member of the class. … In this circuit, the necessary scienter can be established by a showing of knowing misconduct or severe recklessness. SEC v. Carriba Air, Inc., 681 F.2d 1318 (11th Cir.1982).

Maritime Management v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 1, 2001

Unlike § 2412(b), which is not limited in this respect, § 2412(d) requires parties to qualify under statutorily prescribed net worth maximums. … Because the EAJA is a waiver of sovereign immunity and as such must be strictly construed, Haitian Refugee Center v.