Case law

Albert Flowers v. City of Melbourne

557 F. App'x 893 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 26, 2014

It is well-established that “the right to make an arrest or investigatory stop necessarily carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat thereof to effect it.” Graham v. … Therefore, the officers are entitled to qualified immunity as to Flowers’ claims against them.

Jeffrey Stanley v. Broward County Sheriff

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 16, 2019

Thus, BSO’s punitive damages argument, and its qualified-immunity argument, which applies only to individual defendants, are both moot. … On remand, the district court held that this language from our prior panel’s opinion recounting the case’s procedural history established as law of the case that Stanley’s claim for damages was withdrawn.

Carl J. Fabry v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

223 F.3d 1261 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 21, 2000

Even the field notes of a du Pont representative admit that the Fabrys had established a premier citrus nursery using state of the art operations. . … The medical expenses and compensation for pain, suffering and emotion distress clearly constitute damages received "on account of personal injuries.” Id.

Miller v. Florida Mining

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 17, 1998

The parties dispute whether the payment qualifies for the § 547(c)(2) exception. … account, and Florida Mining’s practice of changing payment terms with each account, the bankruptcy court’s factual determination that the payment was in the ordinary course of business vis-a-vis these two parties was not clearly

Miller v. Florida Mining

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 17, 1998

The parties dispute whether the payment qualifies for the § 547(c)(2) exception. … account, and Florida Mining's practice of changing payment terms with each account, the bankruptcy court's factual determination that the payment was in the ordinary course of business vis-a-vis these two parties was not clearly

United States v. Stanley Moscova

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 12, 2019

The district court explained its ruling this way: “So how does this raise immunity? The testimony of the witness is clearly that nobody told her that she would not be prosecuted for anything she told them. … Her second response rebutted the first suggestion, and the final comment did not come close to establishing that Cortes Guevara was offered use or transactional immunity.

United States v. Steven Allen Simmons

961 F.2d 183 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 14, 1992

counsel may make strategic decision to waive change of venue due to possible jury prejudice). 2 Given the final colloquy and the strong possibility of a strategic decision by defense counsel, any error by the lower court is clearly … Throughout the proceedings, Simmons carefully responded to each of the trial court’s questions, answering “yes” and “no” when appropriate, and qualifying his answers when necessary. See United States v.

United States v. Manoucheka Charles

722 F.3d 1319 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 25, 2013

The state court explained that the analyst who testified was qualified as an expert and could testify as to the operation of the machine and the established laboratory procedures. Id. at 2713 . … In Melendez-Diaz , the Court clearly held that it is the government who must produce witnesses adverse to the defendant.

Neil Khan v. Katherine Fernandez-Rundle

287 F. App'x 50 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 3, 2007

The court assumed that Khan had alleged a violation of his constitutional right to free speech, but concluded that Khan’s supervisors were nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity on the ground that the violation was … not clearly established at the time they fired him.

Nancy Carola Jacobsen v. Florida Secretary of State

957 F.3d 1193 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 29, 2020

After all, parties that have qualified to be on the ballot are similarly situated with respect to any right to be first on the ballot. … To me, the Secretary of State’s role in elections, specifically ballot ordering, points more clearly to the conclusion that she enforces the statute.

Evans v. McClain of Georgia, Inc.

131 F.3d 957 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 18, 1997

; and other equally or less qualified employees who were not members of the protected class were promoted. … While this motivation is clearly unlawful under the National Labor Relations Act, see McClain of Georgia, Inc., 322 N.L.R.B. 367 (1996), it in no way violates Title VII or § 1981.

Cynthia Davis v. Valsamis, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 30, 2018

First, Defendant qualifies to receive the rights conferred by the Himalaya Clause as a “supplier” or “manufacturer of component parts” for the Carnival Triumph. … Viewing the contract as a whole, as we must, Clause 12(a) clearly expresses the intent to bar suit unless notice of a claim is timely provided to the offending party.

Kyle Bosarge v. Mobile Area Water & Sewer Service

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 24, 2022

immunity. … Plaintiff did not identify the qualified immunity ruling in his opening brief as an issue for appeal, nor did he offer any substantive argument on the qualified immunity issue in his opening brief.

Albert Adefemi v. John Ashcroft

386 F.3d 1022 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 30, 2003

That is, we have jurisdiction to determine whether Adefemi is deportable because he has been “convicted under any law” of a qualifying firearms offense. 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(2)(C). … Since the front side of the document clearly charges Adefemi with an offense, and since Adefemi has never argued that the signatures are not his, we will treat them as such.

Findwhat Investor Group v. Findwhat.com

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 30, 2011

However, no § 20(a) claim can lie without first establishing a successful § 10(b) claim. See Thompson v. … The securities laws do not immunize defendants who knowingly disseminate materially false or misleading information simply because their fraud concerns false information already believed by the market.

Zuzanna Juris v. Inamed Corporation

685 F.3d 1294 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 6, 2012

In 1999, Judge Pointer directed that notice of the proposed Inamed class settlement be mailed to all individuals registered with the MDL 926 claims office, except for those who clearly would not qualify as class members or … She was, according to her physician, suffering from “silicone-related immune dysfunction, atypical neurological disease and infection.”

United States v. Robert Joseph Valerio

718 F.3d 1321 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 20, 2013

We review the district court’s factual findings under the clearly erroneous standard; we review de novo its application of the law to those facts.” United States v. … Valerio did not qualify for the Terry exception to the Fourth Amendment’s probable cause rule. Instead, the passage of time between Mr.

Keller v. Miami Herald Publishing Co.

778 F.2d 711 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 19, 1985

Finally, the medium in which the statement was expressed clearly signaled to its readers that the statement was merely an opinion. … Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 , 94 S.Ct. 2997 , 41 L.Ed.2d 789 (1974), the Supreme Court suggested that the first amendment immunizes statements of pure opinion from defamation suits, because unlike statements of fact,

50 Fair empl.prac.cas. 163, 50 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 39,089 Willie Jones v. Joseph Gerwens, as Chief of Police of the City of Fort Lauderdale Police Department, and City of Fort Lauderdale Police Department

874 F.2d 1534 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 13, 1989

Id. 8 The court found, with respect to the charges of untruthfulness and failure to obey an order, that Jones' disparate treatment claim also failed, because "[t]he evidence clearly shows that white officers charged with … This may be done by showing (i) that he belongs to a racial minority; (ii) that he applied and was qualified for a job for which the employer was seeking applicants; (iii) that, despite his qualifications, he was rejected

Solomon v. Liberty County Commissioners

166 F.3d 1135 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 3, 1999

We do not find that the district court clearly erred in rendering its finding on Senate Factor 5. … Appellees point to four portions of the record that they contend support the district court’s finding: (1) testimony that “blacks have frequently not known nor asked about alternatives to paying qualifying fees”; (2) Solomon