Case law

United States v. Zerry Feaster

798 F.3d 1374 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 25, 2015

Under this language, the “but if” clause sets forth the only exception to the general felony rule established by the first clause of the statute. See id. … The fact that the second clause acts as a safety valve for thefts of a total of $1,000 or less does not somehow cause felony convictions that do not qualify for the exception because they add up to more than $1,000 to

United States v. Drury

344 F.3d 1089 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 2, 2003

Here, after reviewing the proffered statement, the district court concluded that “[i]n my view, the conditions established by this case of the admissibility of such a statement have not been established here.” … Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not clearly abuse its discretion in this regard. F.

Panola Land Buying Ass'n v. Clark

844 F.2d 1506 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 17, 1988

That provision clearly manifests Congress’ intent that the prevailing party’s lawyer is not considered to be an applicant under the EAJA. … Admittedly, there is no precise definition for the interest a would be intervenor must claim in order to qualify under Rule 24(a).

Bernie Harry, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Lisa Normil, Deceased v. Wayne Marchant, M.D., Ali Bazzi, M.D.

237 F.3d 1315 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 22, 2001

This scenario clearly conflicts with a common sense reading of EMTALA as well as the congressional intent to protect patients in this very circumstance. 4 See Hardy, 164 F.3d at 795 (“The core purpose of EMTALA ... is to … To establish a claim under § 1981, a plaintiff must allege facts in support of the following elements: (1) the plaintiff is a member of a racial minority; (2) an intent to discriminate on the basis of race by the defendant

In Re Brickell Investment Corp., Debtor. Internal Revenue Service v. Brickell Investment Corp., in Re Brickell Investment Corp., Debtor. Internal Revenue Service v. Dade Helicopter Jet Service, Inc. And Tropical Helicopter Airways, Inc.

922 F.2d 696 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 28, 1991

The I.R.S. argued that (1) sovereign immunity barred a fee award, (2) the motion for costs and fees was untimely, (3) the debtors had failed to exhaust their administrative remedies as required by 26 U.S.C. … In re Davis held that the bankruptcy court did not have jurisdiction to award attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA") and that the trustee of a bankruptcy estate did not qualify as a "party" eligible

United States v. Garland George Curtis

380 F.3d 1311 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 11, 2004

Bojan’s cooperation in this case, the government will consider same for a determination of whether he qualifies for substantial assistance, the same as any cooperating defendant. … The district court denied Curtis’ motion for a mistrial, holding that the evidence clearly established that “there is no deal that was made with reference to Bojan’s testimony.”

Sikkander Subjali Chacku v. U.S. Attorney General

555 F.3d 1281 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 19, 2008

The BIA stated that, pursuant to INA 1 Although the term “priorty date” is not clearly defined by statute or caselaw, an alien’s priority date is the date on which his labor certification is approved, … at which point he is permitted to file an I-140 “Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker” form to establish his eligibility to file the I- 485 form.

Waseem Daker v. Rebecca Keaton

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

Judicial officers also are not absolutely immune from suits for declaratory relief if the plaintiff establishes a violation, a serious risk of continuing irreparable injury if the relief is not granted, and the absence … We note that a district court must give a pro se plaintiff at least one opportunity to amend his complaint before dismissing it with prejudice, unless the plaintiff clearly indicates he does not want to amend the complaint

Bill L. Harbert v. United States

206 F. App'x 903 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 14, 2006

Harbert is also the former managing director of Bilhar International Establishment (“Bilhar”), formerly known as Harbert International Establishment. … It is well established that, ‘“[a]bsent a waiver, sovereign immunity shields the Federal Government and its agencies from suit.”’ JBP Acquisitions, LP v. U.S. ex rel.

Jones v. American General Life & Accident Insurance

370 F.3d 1065 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 18, 2004

contributions for continued medical coverage is to read into the summary something its authors did not put there (a promise to provide lifetime ‘paid up’ medical insurance), while reading out of the summary something that clearly … According to the Court, “given [the objectives outlined in §§ 2(b) and 404(a)], it is hard to imagine why Congress would want to immunize breaches of fiduciary obligation that harm individuals by denying injured beneficiaries

36 soc.sec.rep.ser. 584, unempl.ins.rep. (Cch) P 16549a Herbert Meyer v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services, James E. Glover, Ss Ple-Au-Vefc v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tom Battle v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health & Human Services, Brenda S. Findley v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services

958 F.2d 1029 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 8, 1992

The EAJA therefore establishes a two-step analysis for determining the appropriate hourly rate to be applied in calculating attorney's fees under the Act. … It is doubtful that Congress envisioned the district courts exercising their discretion by declining, without explanation, to apply the cost-of-living escalator; such an interpretation would clearly contravene the purpose

Jeffrey Michael Selman v. Cobb Co. School District

449 F.3d 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 25, 2006

Because neutrality cannot be clearly defined for all times in absolute terms, “[e]ach value judgment under the Religion Clauses must therefore turn on whether particular acts in question are intended to establish or interfere … All documentary evidence should be clearly marked and identified.

United States v. Jean Joseph Deeb

13 F.3d 1532 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 15, 1994

The two requirements are, first, that the prosecution establish that the hearsay declarant is unavailable, id. at 65 , 100 S.Ct. at 2538, and, second, that the prosecution establish that the hearsay statement bears the “indicia … All of the evidence that Deeb sought to establish with the suggested lines of inquiry either was or could have been established through other means.

Johnny Reynolds v. Joe McInnes

380 F.3d 1303 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 10, 2004

The Article includes additional provisions designed to guarantee that newly available openings in any given classification would be filled by qualified African-American candidates,4 and to ensure that any restructuring … In Moore, we held that a white school teacher did not have standing to enforce a court order against a school board where the order was framed so as to establish a racially-neutral school system.

Lydia Rosenfeld v. Oceania Cruises, Inc.

682 F.3d 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 7, 2012

In effect, all Vournechis could establish was that the floor was slippery when wet. … At most, all the expert’s testimony could possibly establish is that a tile floor could be slippery when wet.

Stardust, 3007 LLC v. City of Brookhaven, Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 10, 2018

On multiple occasions, the City’s code enforcement officers visited the Stardust store and identified merchandise that qualified as sexual devices. … ]he establishment regularly features said items.”

Federal Trade Commission v. Randall L. Leshin

719 F.3d 1227 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 5, 2013

is consistent with the general rule that a disgorgement order “establishes a personal liability, which the defendant must satisfy regardless whether he retains the . . . … Under [Defendant’s] approach, for example, a defendant who was careful to spend all the proceeds of his fraudulent scheme, while husbanding his other assets, would be immune from an order of disgorgement

40 Fair empl.prac.cas. 998, 40 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 36,110 John H. Lewis v. Federal Prison Industries, Inc., a Corporation Chartered Under the Laws of the United States

786 F.2d 1537 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 22, 1986

After a nonjury trial, the district court concluded that Lewis had not established a prima facie case of age discrimination. Because the district court made a clearly erroneous finding of fact, we reverse and remand. … Thus, the evidence clearly indicates that the district court's finding that the responsible management of FPI did not know that the limited steps it took to remedy the problem were ineffective is clearly erroneous.

United States v. Edgar Jamal Gamory

635 F.3d 480 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 11, 2011

We conclude that the rap video would not qualify under Crawford’s definition of “testimonial.” Id. at 51-52, 124 S. Ct. at 1364; see also, Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813, 126 S. … For these reasons, we cannot conclude that the District Court clearly erred in failing to find purposeful discrimination was not clearly erroneous. D.

Chandler v. Miller

73 F.3d 1543 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 22, 1996

This rule is no more than a recognition of a State’s constitutional responsibility for the establishment and operation of its own *1548 government, as well as the qualifications of an appropriately designated class of public … We think an audience would much more clearly perceive the intended message of one who burns a draft card than the message of one who declines to take a drug test. See generally Clark v.