Case law

Bellsouth Advertising & Publishing Corp. v. Donnelley Information PubLishing, Inc.

933 F.2d 952 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 18, 1991

The antitrust misuse defense is an established defense to patent infringement. 27 The policy supporting the patent misuse defense lies in the equitable clean hands doctrine. … The notes themselves clearly never change, but the manner in which the notes arrange, assembled by an inventive mind, is property of a protected kind.

United States v. Freeman Eugene Jockisch

857 F.3d 1122 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 26, 2017

Clearly, the Supreme Court was examining a very different type of statute than the one at issue here. … Similarly here, Defendant clearly intended to persuade a minor to engage in sexual activity.

Donald C. Maynard v. Pneumatic Products Corp.

256 F.3d 1259 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 12, 2001

Second, we must decide whether the activities Maynard claims are substantially limited by his back injury qualify as major life activities under the ADA. See id. … Drexel Univ., 94 F.3d 102, 105 (3d Cir. 1996)) (“Although the record clearly indicates that [appellant] suffers an impairment that affects to some degree his ability to walk, he has not ‘adduced sufficient evidence from

State of Georgia v. Jeffrey Clark

119 F.4th 1304 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 24, 2024

Indeed, I can’t say that the district court clearly erred in concluding DOJ leadership did not authorize Clark’s acts. … Again, nothing in the record supports the conclusion that the district court’s factual finding was clearly erroneous.

State of Georgia, Department of Medical Assistance v. Shalala

8 F.3d 1565 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 21, 1994

The Medicaid statute does not clearly state whether the less restrictive methodology permitted by § 1396a is to be defined within the parameters set by § 1396b. … medicare beneficiaries) and (ii) (qualified disabled and working individuals).

United States v. De Varon

136 F.3d 740 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 3, 1998

The officer then deducted two levels because De Varon qualified for the "safety valve" provision under U.S.S.G. … Simply put, the drug courier may or may not qualify for a minor role reduction. See, e.g., United States v.

Faragher v. City of Boca Raton

111 F.3d 1530 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 15, 1997

The very purpose of agency is to establish an employer’s liability specifically for acts of which it has no knowledge. … A Title VII claimant, however, must establish that the employer intended the harassment.

Medical Association of Georgia v. Wellpoint, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 18, 2014

It is only those doctors who provided services between the delineated dates that were clearly informed of the release. … The Settlement Agreement here did not immunize WellPoint for future underpayments to doctors.

Bartels v. Alabama Commercial College, Inc.

54 F.3d 702 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 13, 1995

In that case, a husband and wife, who claimed that the wife had contracted acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) from a transfusion of contaminated blood the Red Cross supplied, filed a state law tort action against … Congress therefore has clearly indicated the particular federal court it sought to confer jurisdiction upon.

Steve Rossbach v. City of Miami

371 F.3d 1354 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 7, 2004

that Plaintiffs: (1) have a disability; (2) are qualified, with or without reasonable accommodations; and (3) were unlawfully discriminated against because of their disability. 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (a). … City of Gloucester, 321 F.3d 21, 25-26 (1st Cir. 2003), the First Circuit held: [A]lthough the record clearly sets forth the City's belief that Sheehan was incapable of working as a Gloucester

American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia v. Rabun County Chamber of Commerce, Inc.

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

Numerous qualified witnesses testified at trial that the latin cross is universally regarded as a symbol of Christianity. … Thus, we are unable to conclude that the district court’s finding was clearly erroneous.

Alvarez v. Attorney General for Fla.

679 F.3d 1257 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 8, 2012

his petition was improper -- but not complaining that the statute itself is flawed -- Smith is ‘complaining of an injury caused by the state-court judgment and seeking review and rejection of that judgment,’ which is clearly … If, however, “the court makes all the necessary orders to ensure the integrity of the specific evidence and the reliability of the testing process and test results,” “the court may order DNA testing by another qualified laboratory

Bryan Henning v. D. Casey

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 19, 2018

Casey Is Entitled to Qualified Immunity on Henning’s § 1983 Illegal Detention Claim. … The district court concluded that Henning’s claim failed as a matter of law because Casey was entitled to qualified immunity. We agree.

Greenbriar, Ltd. v. City Of Alabaster

881 F.2d 1570 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 1, 1989

We agree. 22 It has long been established that zoning regulations will not be declared unconstitutional as violative of substantive due process unless they "are clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation … Hence, we do not address it 5 The award was against the City alone, and not against the Mayor or Council members in their individual capacities, who were found to be entitled to absolute immunity as legislators.

Satellite Broadcasting & Communications Ass'n of America v. Oman

17 F.3d 344 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 24, 1994

Moreover, the Office concluded that § 111(f) was “clearly directed at localized retransmission services,” based on the section’s provision that “two or more cable systems in contiguous communities ... operating from one head-end … In particular, nothing in this Act is intended to reflect any view concerning whether ... an entity that retransmits television broadcast signals by satellite to private homes could qualify as a "cable system” under section

Moye, O'Brien, O'Rourke, Hogan, & Pickert v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.

376 F.3d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 2004

In 1988, Congress established an Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) within Amtrak. Congress established the OIG within Amtrak under the Inspector General Act of 1978, 5 U.S.C. … Fourth, Amtrak argues that its detailed evidentiary submissions to the district court at the bench trial clearly established that the audit work papers 8 sought by the firm embodied

Durr v. Shinseki

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 19, 2011

The VA has a clear, established policy of not applying the probationary period set out in § 7403(b)(1) to temporary appointments under § 7405, and for that reason does not credit temporary service under § 7405 toward the … it we also made clear that “courts may reach results inconsistent with the plain meaning of a statute ‘if giving the words of a statute their plain and ordinary meaning produces a result that is not just unwise but is clearly

Arthur C. Johnson v. Coffee County Commissioner

714 F. App'x 942 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 31, 2017

Discriminatory Promotion Claim To establish a prima facie case of discrimination based on a failure to promote, a plaintiff may show that he: (1) belongs to a protected class; (2) applied for and was qualified for … immunity.

Tareon Kelsey v. Nelly F. Withers

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 4, 2017

This well-established principle does not vanish when the district court denies a motion for summary judgment on immunity grounds, filed in violation of a scheduling order. See Torres v. … Iowa 2008) (“While law enforcement officers are permitted to raise the defense of qualified immunity repeatedly throughout a litigation, they are not permitted to ignore a court’s trial management orders.”).

United States v. Padilla-Martinez

762 F.2d 942 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 11, 1985

In situations such as this, the decision of the judge to disqualify the retained counsel should not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous. See, United States v. Hobson, 672 F.2d 825 (11th Cir.1982). … The lieutenant’s training and experience allowed the court to qualify him as an expert who could testify about a common scenario and the court committed no error in doing so.