Case law

United States v. Dodge

566 F.3d 976 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 14, 2009

Title I of the Act, SORNA, establishes a national sex offender registry law, the purpose of which is “to protect the public from sex offenders and offenders against children.” 42 U.S.C. § 16901. … Under SORNA, Dodge qualifies as a “sex offender” if he was convicted of a “criminal offense that is a specified offense against a minor.” 42 U.S.C. § 16911(5)(A)(ii).

United States v. Louis Broadwell, A/K/A Drifter, Ulice Melton, A/K/A Cloud Nine, Gene, and Michael Anthony Blanton

870 F.2d 594 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 19, 1989

First, the court stated that the kidnapping charges were clearly separated from the charges against Melton. … At trial, Barrett testified under a grant of immunity after invoking his fifth amendment rights. 30 .

Orvel Winston Lloyd v. Judge Robert Foster

298 F. App'x 836 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 30, 2008

Those other actions clearly occurred during the initiation and pursuit of a criminal prosecution. … However, we held in McDougald that a notice of appeal could not establish an intent to appeal from an order that had not yet been entered when the notice of appeal was filed. Id.

Royal Cup, Inc. v. Jenkins Coffee Service, Inc.

898 F.2d 1514 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 25, 1990

the criteria on the basis of which an account would qualify as active. … II. 42 Royal Cup relies on the well-established principle that a court must attempt to reconcile a jury's apparently inconsistent answers to special interrogatories. See Gallick v.

United States v. Clare Therese Grady

18 F.4th 1275 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 22, 2021

[The] determination that a defendant is not entitled to acceptance of responsibility will not be set aside unless the facts in the record clearly establish that a defendant has accepted personal responsibility.” … Accordingly, this is not one of those “rare” instances in which the record clearly establishes that the defendant accepted responsibility and should receive a reduction despite putting the government to its burden of proof

Bonapfel v. Nalley Motor Trucks (In re Carpet Center Leasing Co.)

153 F.2d 682 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 20, 1993

The Trustee insists that in order for a claim to qualify as an “actual, necessary cost and expense of preserving the estate” under 11 U.S.C. § 503 (b), the creditor must establish that there has been an actual, concrete benefit … These challenges to the evidentiary basis of the Bankruptcy Court’s ruling must be reviewed on a clearly erroneous standard.

Donya Mitchell v. Gene Pope

189 F. App'x 911 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 2006

Ellerth, 118 S.Ct. 2257 (1998), and (2) were entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity on Plaintiff’s § 1983 claims. 6  Plaintiff also points to … Suders, 124 S.Ct. 2342, 2347 (2004) (to establish constructive discharge, plaintiff must show that the abusive working environment became so intolerable that her resignation qualified as a fitting response).

Gary Dear v. Q Club Hotel, LLC

933 F.3d 1286 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 9, 2019

The qualifier’s inclusion, therefore, suggests that “revised charge[s]” can (and often will) include changes that apply from one year to the next. … We note in closing that even if Dear had preserved this issue, he hasn’t established—or even really tried to establish—why the jury’s verdict was wrong.

John Dillard v. Baldwin County Commissioners

225 F.3d 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2000

See Complaint, ¶ 14 (alleging that “Plaintiff-Inter-venors ... are residents, citizens, and qualified electors of Baldwin County, Alabama. … The Eleventh Amendment protects state sovereign immunity in federal courts. See Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Tribe of Idaho, 521 U.S. 261, 267 , 117 S.Ct. 2028, 2033 , 138 L.Ed.2d 438 (1997).

Christin Bilotti v. Florida Department of Corrections

133 F.4th 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 11, 2025

And because Da- vis isn’t clearly established Supreme Court law, the R&R reasoned, Bilotti cannot rely on it under AEDPA. So the R&R determined that Bilotti failed to establish prejudice. … An “unreasonable applica- tion” of clearly established federal law occurs when “the state court correctly identifies the governing legal princi- ple . . . but unreasonably applies

Henry E. Adams v. Cobb County School District

242 F. App'x 616 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 15, 2007

immunity. … Under that framework, Adams must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination. See Crawford v. City of Fairburn, Ga., 482 F.3d 1305, 1309 (11th Cir. 2007).

Emmanuel Priva v. U.S. Attorney General

34 F.4th 946 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 12, 2022

USCA11 Case: 20-12521 Date Filed: 05/12/2022 Page: 23 of 33 20-12521 Opinion of the Court 23 As a general matter, to qualify for CAT relief, “an alien must establish … This case presents us with an opportunity to clearly address this question.

Bingham, Ltd. v. United States

724 F.2d 921 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 9, 1984

The first problem relates to the adequacy of the established factual basis upon which the district court resolved a difficult question of statutory construction. … Although this exemption clearly was designed to accommodate sporting enthusiasts, see H.R. Rep.

Alan Dershowitz v. Cable News Network, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2025

And Begala wrote that “[t]he Dershowitz Doctrine would make presidents immune from every criminal act.” … As research progressed, the authors ignored materials except those that were derogatory of Goldwater—even when complimentary statements expressly qualified the derogatory ones. Id.

Stephen Ganstine v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

502 F. App'x 905 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 26, 2012

To establish a prima facie case of retaliation, Mr. … Garrett, 531 U.S. 356, 374 (2001) (holding that Congress did not validly abrogate states’ sovereign immunity for private suits seeking money damages under Title I of the ADA).

C.A. La Seguridad, as Subrogee v. Transytur Line, in Personam and M/v Nela Altomare, Her Engines, Boilers, Etc., in Rem

707 F.2d 1304 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 24, 1983

La Seguridad urges that the mere failure to deliver the goods to it in Venezuela establishes a prima facie case, and that these facts are already established. … If the defendant cannot establish what facts will be relevant at trial, it cannot establish where these facts will be found.

United States v. Roger Ross

686 F. App'x 691 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 21, 2017

Once qualified, an expert witness has latitude to offer his opinion, so long as his testimony establishes that he has “a reliable basis in the knowledge and experience of his discipline” to provide an opinion. … The district court did not clearly err when it determined that a conspiracy existed because Ross’s own statements established the existence of a conspiracy by the preponderance of the evidence.

U.S. Steel Mining Company, LLC v. Cassandra M. Terry

920 F.3d 1283 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 11, 2019

The NIOSH B Reader Program”: “The B Reader Program aims to ensure competency in radiographic reading by evaluating the ability of readers to classify a test set of radiographs, thereby creating and maintaining a pool of qualified … There is one final point: Because we find that § 932(l)’s language is clear— and that it clearly favors Carrie and Cassandra’s position—we have no occasion to resort to the principles of deference embodied in Chevron, U.S.A

United States v. Priscilla Ann Ellis

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 13, 2020

appropriate either where time is of the essence, such as “situations where important public policy issues are involved or those where rights delayed are rights denied,” or where “the position of one of the parties is clearly … Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), federal actors enjoy qualified immunity for acts done in the actor’s official capacity. Corr. Serv. Corp. v. Malesko, 534 U.S. 61, 72 (2001).

Club Car, Inc. v. Club Car (Quebec) Import, Inc.

362 F.3d 775 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 15, 2004

Expert testimony is admissible if (1) the expert is qualified to testify on the topic at issue, (2) the methodology used by the expert is sufficiently reliable, and (3) the testimony will assist the trier of fact. … The instruction was not so misleading as to clearly prejudice CCQ. Ford, 289 F.3d at 1288.