Case law

Scarfo v. Ginsberg

175 F.3d 957 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 14, 1999

The district court determined that the evidence did not establish a high degree of interrelatedness between Galaxy Frame, DBG 95, Dr. … Summary judgment thus would have been appropriate only if there were no disputed issues of material fact—and, as the record in this case clearly demonstrates, this was not the case here.

Trusted Net Media Holdings, LLC v. Morrison Agency, Inc.

550 F.3d 1035 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 2, 2008

Title 28 Congress established the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy courts in Title 28. Kontrick v. Ryan, 540 U.S. 443, 453 , 124 S.Ct. 906, 914 , 157 L.Ed.2d 867 (2004). … Section 303(b), the subsection with which we are primarily concerned, sets forth the prerequisites for commencing an involuntary petition, specifically who is qualified to do so, as follows: An involuntary case against a

Peter Letterese & Associates, Inc. v. World Institute of Scientology Enterprises, International

533 F.3d 1287 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 8, 2008

That WISE charged $75 for each Sales Course pack clearly demonstrates the commercial purpose of the course materials. … Establishment v. Columbia Broad. Sys. Inc., 503 F.

William James Siskos v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 4, 2020

To prevail on a civil rights action under § 1983, a plaintiff must establish that he was deprived of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). … Contrary to Siskos’s contentions, there is no “immunity” from the Heck bar available to him based on his alleged incompetence.

United States v. Elmore Roy Anderson

326 F.3d 1319 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 11, 2003

Schmidt also worked out bid rigging agreements with representatives from Fuller, the third qualified bidder on Contract 20A. … was charged and what the government’s evidence established at trial.

Larry Horton v. City of St. Augustine

272 F.3d 1318 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 15, 2001

It is well-established in this Circuit that “[a] preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy not to be granted unless the movant clearly established the ‘burden of persuasion’” as to all four elements … Horton’s challenge does not qualify under the specialized exception for “prior restraints on speech” because it does not involve a permitting or licensing scheme or other prior review but instead an after-the-fact enforcement

Lawrence v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC

666 F. App'x 875 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 22, 2016

Recognizing that the unqualified provision of his cell phone number to Bayview qualifies as prior express consent under the TCPA, Lawrence also claims that the District Court should have found that a genuine issue of material … Finally, Lawrence argues that the District Court erred by finding that it was an undisputed material fact that he had *883 only orally revoked consent to be called three times. 7 He contends that his testimony clearly shows

Langfitt v. Federal Marine Terminals, Inc.

647 F.3d 1116 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2011

Compl. at 3–4 (September 9, 2008). 4 an affirmative defense, that it was Langfitt’s employer, under § 904(a), at the time of Langfitt’s injury and therefore immune from … Swan, an FMT-employed supervisor and the man Langfitt recognized and considered to be “the guy running what was going on down in the [SJARD’s hold],” clearly controlled and directed Langfitt’s work inside the SJARD.

Maris Distributing Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.

302 F.3d 1207 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 19, 2002

Anticompetitive actions are not immunized by virtue of being memorialized in a contract. … Clearly, they could.

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.

Wayne v. Jarvis

197 F.3d 1098 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 8, 1999

Wayne contends that the testimony of that officer might have helped him establish the existence of a custom or policy. … In addition, the court denied the deputy sheriffs’ claim that they were entitled to qualified immunity on Wayne’s § 1983 claims against them in their individual capacities.

James Hall . Secretary, State of Alabama

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2018

electors who cast ballots for the office of Governor in the last general election for the state, county, district, or other political subdivision in which the candidate seeks to qualify.” … In that case, a candidate challenged an Ohio ballot access law requiring independent candidates to gather signatures from 7% of the qualified voters in the district. Id. at 41-42.

United States v. William Emmett LeCroy, Jr.

441 F.3d 914 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 2, 2006

It is simply well established law–the background against which statutes are enacted–which indicates that elements of a crime should be submitted to the grand jury. … LeCroy’s prior crimes–burglary and statutory rape–were clearly probative of the question of whether he posed a future threat.

Jane Doe v. Roy Black

749 F.3d 999 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 18, 2014

After Jane Doe No. 2 joined the initial petition, the district court found that both women qualified as “crime victims” under the Act. 18 U.S.C. § 3771(e). … These claims of privilege, however tenuous, are sufficient to establish jurisdiction under Perlman.

Shahar v. Bowers

70 F.3d 1218 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 20, 1995

The Supreme Court of Hawaii, however, has held that restricting marital relation to male and female establishes a sex-based classification subject to a strict scrutiny test in a state equal protection challenge. … Since the district court granted summary judgment for Bowers on all claims it did not address his assertion of qualified immunity.

David Peery v. City of Miami

977 F.3d 1061 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 1, 2020

The City discarded only property that was “commingled with [items] . . . that clearly pose[d] health and security concerns”—in other words, items Pottinger permitted the City to discard. … The modification establishes that “after [that] warning, [the] person . . . may [not fully] obstruct a sidewalk.”

William Todd Overcash v. Mark D. Shelnutt

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 12, 2018

The Convention acknowledges that signatory countries will need to establish or maintain “immunities or jurisdictional privileges” for public officials “for the performance of their functions,” and it gives no indication … Although he makes no such claim, we presume that he appeals the qualified immunity 7  Case: 17-13721 Date Filed: 10/12/2018 Page: 8 of 14

Christopher Edward Hallett v. State of Ohio

711 F. App'x 949 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 10, 2017

A claim that purports to arise under the Constitution or a federal statute may be dismissed if the alleged claim “clearly appears to be immaterial and made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction” or if “such a … The Eleventh Amendment provides immunity for states from lawsuits brought by “Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.” U.S. Const. amend. XI.

Donelle Keaton v. Cobb County, Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 30, 2009

The magistrate also determined that Sfreddo and Marchant-Wellman were not entitled to qualified immunity. … Goldkist, Inc., 267 F.3d 1264, 1267-68 (11th Cir. 2001) (more qualified candidate); Moulds v.

Eric Goldstein v. City of Sunrise

143 F. App'x 295 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 13, 2005

James Skellion’s appeal from the district court’s omnibus order holding that he is not entitled to qualified immunity and, consistent with that holding, denying Skellion’s motion to dismiss and his motion for summary judgment … Count III of the amended complaint alleges that Skellion, among others, “clearly violated established statutory or constitutional rights” (emphasis added) of Goldstein.