Case law

United States v. George Terzado-Madruga

897 F.2d 1099 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 11, 1990

The Sixth Amendment has not been interpreted to provide a cloak of immunity for a defendant during the pendency of an indictment, see Hoffa v. … The testimony concerning the composition of cutting agents in the cocaine is clearly relevant to the charges against Ter-zado.

Blue Sky L. Rep. P 72,098 Pete J. Buffo v. Charles A. Graddick, Attorney General of the State of Alabama, Respondent

742 F.2d 592 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 20, 1984

Novel or atypical methods should not provide immunity from the securities laws.” Id. at 10 n. 7, 92 S.Ct. at 168 n. 7 (quoting A.T. Brod & Co. v. Perlow, 375 F.2d 393, 397 (2d Cir.1967) with alteration in original). … The evidence adduced at Buffo’s trial was clearly adequate on this point. Evidence showing an overvaluation of 40 times the land’s actual worth permitted the jury to infer that Buffo knew his appraisal was false.

Joseph N. Monteleone v. CORIZON

686 F. App'x 655 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 20, 2017

Alvarez denied that request because he did not qualify for the boots under Corizon’s policy. In May of 2014, Dr. Alvarez renewed Mr. Monteleone’s medical pass for restricted activity, but determined that Mr. … The panel affirmed the district court’s decision to set aside a prison officer’s qualified immunity in that § 1983 case because it reasoned that “several weeks was too long to fail to properly respond to the medical need

United States v. Pedro Pablo Mesa

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 11, 2001

The district court's findings of fact are not clearly erroneous. … Alred, 144 F.3d 1405 (11th Cir.1998), to establish that he was not an organizer/leader in this offense.

United States v. Hayward Feaster

394 F. App'x 561 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 24, 2010

The Court qualified the right to bear arms: “[l]ike most rights, [it] is not unlimited.” Id. at 2816. … First, there is no dispute that the district court accurately calculated the guideline range, treated the Guidelines as advisory, and based the sentence on facts that were not clearly erroneous.

Joseph Lamar v. Fred Banks, Warden, Gwinnett County Correctional Institute

684 F.2d 714 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 26, 1982

It is clearly apparent, however, that the petitioner was charged with violating only subsection (a) of the statute. … We are driven to the conclusion that the case must be remanded for an evidentiary hearing at which petitioner will be given a chance to establish that what he said, under all the circumstances, did not directly tend to cause

Ivory Scott v. Suncoast Beverage Sales

295 F.3d 1223 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 25, 2002

The court distinguished Ross, stating: 11  The facts of Ross, however, are clearly distinguishable. … sent, 2) it did not establish that she is a proper records custodian, 3) it did not establish that she had knowledge of the company’s ordinary course of business at the time in question, and 4) her testimony only related

United States v. Meros

866 F.2d 1304 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 13, 1989

(en banc), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1054 , 107 S.Ct. 2192 , 95 L.Ed.2d 847 (1987) (false testimony that witness had not been given immunity from prosecution); Williams v. … We are convinced that Meros’ actions fall within the scope of criminal liability established by our previous decisions.

Willie James Hall v. Frederick Head

310 F.3d 683 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 25, 2002

First, relief may be available if the state habeas court decision is “contrary to” clearly established United States Supreme Court precedent. … That measuring stick is “clearly established Federal law.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). “Clearly established federal law is not the case law of the lower federal courts, including this Court.”

Long v. Cooper

848 F.2d 1202 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 8, 1988

., alleging that numerous statements in the column were defamatory to them. 1 James Long is the president of Long’s Electronics, a closely-held Alabama corporation which sells satellite television equipment wholesale to qualified … The only issue we address is whether Long and Long’s Electronics 3 are limited public figures. 4 In Silvester , we adopted the three-part analysis for establishing limited public figure status set forth in Waldbaum v.

Nuvasive, Inc. v. Absolute Medical, LLC

71 F.4th 861 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 21, 2023

We cannot say that these factual findings are clearly erroneous. … The district court’s factual find- ings as to the second Bonar prong were not clearly erroneous.

Ismael Perez v. Assistant Field Office Director, Krome North Service Processing Center

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 6, 2026

Even if an alien secures TPS, asylum, or a deferral of removal, under the Government’s reading, he nevertheless “shall be detained” until he can establish “clearly and beyond a doubt” a right to … The structure of § 1225 confirms what the text inde- pendently establishes. See Robinson v.

William Attix v. Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC

35 F.4th 1284 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 26, 2022

The FAA “also establishes procedures by which federal courts implement [its] substantive rule.” Rent-A-Center, W., Inc. v. Jackson, 561 U.S. 63, 68 (2010). … The Parties Clearly and Unmistakably Agreed to Delegate Questions of Arbitrability to an Arbitrator We first consider whether Attix and Carrington clearly and unmistakably agreed to delegate questions of

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. … As we read the colloquy, JCS did not waive the contract’s threshold requirement that only a prevailing party, when clearly ascertainable, may recover attorneys’ fees.

The American Civil Liberties Union Of Georgia v. Rabun County Chamber Of Commerce

678 F.2d 1379 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 21, 1982

ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE 32 The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits Congress from making any law "respecting the establishment of religion ...." U.S.Const., Amend. I. … Numerous qualified witnesses testified at trial that the latin cross is universally regarded as a symbol of Christianity.

Wellington Specialty Ins. Company v. Kendall Crane Service

434 F. App'x 794 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 12, 2011

temporary worker of Kendall Crane, the only way that the policy’s employee exclusion applies is if it incorporates the concept of a statutory employee as defined in Florida’s workers’ compensation laws, and if Garcia in fact qualified … In return, the statute immunizes general contractors from tort liability for the injuries of its subcontractors’ employees. See Fla. Stat. § 440.10(1)(e).

Marshall v. City of Cape Coral

797 F.2d 1555 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 3, 1986

The uncontroverted facts here establish that these requirements were met and Marshall does not assert that they were not. Thus, there is no genuine issue of material fact that the pre-termination procedures afforded Mr. … Kuyk enjoyed an absolute immunity under Florida law in connection with the dismissal memorandum. See, e.g., Skoblow v. Ameri-Manage, Inc., 483 So.2d 809 (Fla. 3d *1562 DCA 1986); Kribs v.

United States v. Kent

175 F.3d 870 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 4, 1999

From these parts, it was possible to assemble either a rifle with a seven-inch barrel that would qualify as a “firearm” or a rifle with a nineteen-and-three-quarters-inch barrel that would not qualify as a “firearm.” … As a result, this Court determined that § 5861(d), “as applied to Owens, clearly was not vague.” Id.

United States v. Dickerson

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 16, 2001

Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), by refusing to disclose a possible promise of immunity made to Williams by Assistant U.S. … In this case, however, the Government presented no "custodian or qualified witness" to authenticate the records as required by the rule. Id.

Haitian Refugee Center, Inc. v. James Baker, Iii, Secretary of State, Robert Kramek, Rear Admiral, Kime, Admiral, Commandant, United States Coast Guard, Gene McNary Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, United States Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service, United States of America, Haitian Refugee Center, Inc., a Not-For-Profit Corporation, Roland Providence, Moise Charles, Eric Pierre, Raymond Edme, Golbert Miracle, Roland Jean, Roosevelt Alexis, Luc Luxembourg Sanon, Leger Pierre Frantz, Ochel Engerril, Jean Michel Mario Avilus, Archille Belvu, Lucien Rozier, Emmanuel Saintil and Condanser Joseph, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Cross-Appellants v. James Baker, Iii, Secretary of State, Rear Admiral Robert Kramek and Admiral Kime, Commandants, United States Coast Guard, Gene McNary Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service, United States Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service, and United States of America, Cross-Appellees

953 F.2d 1498 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 24, 1992

The preliminary injunction, however, clearly raises this question. By its terms, the injunction extends to all "interdicted class members." … Such refusal is usually considered immune to judicial review."