Case law

Javier Ramos v. Secretary, Florida Dept. Of Corrections

441 F. App'x 689 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 28, 2011

And, as we have stated, habeas relief is only granted when the trial court’s decision is contrary to or an objectively unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). … As stated above, habeas relief is only granted when the trial court’s decision is contrary to or an objectively unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1).

Board of Trustees of the City of Delray Beach Police & Firefighters Retirement System v. Citigroup Global Markets Inc.

622 F.3d 1335 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 8, 2010

This issue is for us, not an arbitrator, to resolve, id., unless the parties have clearly delegated to the arbitrator responsibility for this determination, AT&T Techs., Inc. v. … In Florida, “[i]t is well-established that an agent’s authority may be inferred from acts, conduct and other circumstances.” Bradley v. Waldrop, 611 So.2d 31, 32 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1992).

United States v. Antonio Farias

836 F.3d 1315 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 1, 2016

In order to establish that the government’s delay in bringing the indictment -- even if it had been filed in a statutorily timely manner -- violated his due process rights, Farias was required to establish both (1) that … prove an official representation to convict Farias, we need not decide whether its evidence supported a finding that the undercover special agents’ representations to Farias regarding the stolen nature of the cigarettes qualified

Robert A. Sweetapple v. Asset Enhancement, Inc.

87 F.4th 1271 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 5, 2023

To be sure, most orders that resolve everything but the amount of attorneys’ fees to be awarded qualify as final, appealable orders. … In a later order, the district court established the amount of the award for fees and costs. Id. at 1210.

Hale Container Line, Inc. v. Houston Sea Packing Co.

137 F.3d 1455 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 3, 1998

In considering the vessels' "carrier" status, the district court noted the qualifications for a vessel, in rem, to qualify as a carrier, and found that the vessels met those requirements because a "master's" sailing of … The district court's conclusion is not clearly erroneous.

J.F. Straw, D/B/A Business Opportunities Digest v. Chase Revel, Inc., D/B/A Entrepreneur Magazine

813 F.2d 356 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 27, 1987

The court found that Entrepreneur Magazine had made deliberate purposeful attempts to establish business contacts in Georgia; received advertising revenues from companies within the state; and had a not insignificant percentage … It is clear that Entrepreneur Magazine qualifies as a media defendant; according to the testimony of Ron Smith, the magazine has a monthly circulation of over 200,000 and is distributed in 16 foreign countries.

Lloyd Chase Allen v. Sec., FL DOC

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 2010

of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). … However, a state supreme court decision does not clearly establish federal law for § 2254(d)(1) purposes. See Thaler v.

Federal Labor Relations Authority v. U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of the Navy, Pensacola Navy Exchange, Pensacola, Florida, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of the Navy, Pensacola Navy Exchange, Pensacola, Florida v. Federal Labor Relations Authority

977 F.2d 545 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 18, 1992

But with no allegation that the government might be operating irregularly, the union cannot establish public interest based on something so tenuous. … for which plaintiff seeks the requested information may be salutary, 'one need only assume that business people will not overlook an opportunity to get cheaply from the Government what otherwise comes dearly, a list of qualified

Rivera v. Allin

144 F.3d 719 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 23, 1998

Similarly, we review the district court’s determination of qualifying strikes de novo. See McGore v. … See 112 F.3d at 1488 (“Clearly, Congress had a rational basis to believe that the fee requirements of the PLRA would further [its] objective.”)

United States v. Odom

252 F.3d 1289 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 31, 2001

Regarding non-economic criminal activity, the Morrison court clearly rejected Congress' ability to "regulate [such] conduct based solely on that conduct's aggregate effect on interstate commerce." Id. … The Government has failed to set forth sufficient evidence establishing that St.

In Re: Eric Watkins

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 1, 2023

Watkins sued the library supervisor and police officers individually for damages un- der § 1983, so to prevail he would have to show that the defendants violated a clearly established constitutional right. … City of Madison, Ala., 959 F.3d 1330, 1338 (11th Cir. 2020) (“[H]e must show that his right was clearly established in light of the specific context of the case, not as a broad general proposition, at

United States v. Dewey M. Hamaker

455 F.3d 1316 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 2006

qualify as either Brady or Jencks Act material, the non-disclosure of the documents did not prejudice Appellants and therefore did not warrant any relief. … For these reasons, the non-disclosure of Kitchens’s informant status prior to trial clearly does not warrant a re-trial. C.

Olan Jett v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, Inc., Medical Expense Plan

890 F.2d 1137 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 18, 1989

The Plan 2 The medical benefits plan in this case was established by Olan Jett's employer, South Central Bell, pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C.A. Sec. 1001 , et seq. (ERISA). … Sides, the outside consultant in this case, was a psychologist rather than an M.D. psychiatrist, and therefore not qualified to assess the medication given to Jett.

Terrell McGinnis v. Ingram Equipment Company, Inc.

918 F.2d 1491 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 27, 1990

This case qualifies as a “hard” case. The district court found that McGinnis “suffered many more racial indignities at the hands of the Company than any one citizen should be called upon to bear in a lifetime.” … McLean Credit Union, 109 S.Ct. at 2373 , found that “the *1499 right to make contracts does not extend, as a matter of either logic or semantics, to conduct by the employer after the contract relation has been established

United States v. Juan Aguiar Parada

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 7, 2026

We provided a “non-exhaustive list” of five factors “that district courts should consider in determin- ing whether a potential caregiver is qualified and free.” Id. at 1316– 17. … This is because, even if the change in law does not establish clearly whether the district court erred, we are “a court of review, not a court of first view.” Callahan v. U.S. Dep’t of Health & Hum.

United States v. Garrison

133 F.3d 831 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 22, 1998

These payroll expenditures then were submitted by Healthmaster to Aetna and falsely identified as employee bonuses to qualify for reimbursement under Medicare. … The record evidences that these facts that support the district judge's upward departure are not clearly erroneous.

United States v. Walter Butler, Jr.

635 F. App'x 585 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 13, 2015

He contends that the district court erred in admitting AT&T Wireless cell-phone records because the government did not establish the admissibility of the records through a custodian or qualified witness. … The proponent may establish the requirements of Rule 803(6) through “the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness.” Fed. R. Evid. 803(6)(D).

United States v. Anthony Tyrone Johnson

877 F.3d 993 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 15, 2017

This conclusion is further supported by numerous unpublished opinions in this Circuit8 and by several decisions of our sister circuits.9 With it established that courts must consider the specified § 3553(a) factors … But where the order is deficient in explanation, the record must clearly imply that the relevant factors were considered—enough so that meaningful appellate review of the factors’ application can take place, rather than

Teper v. Miller

82 F.3d 989 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 24, 1996

The regulation also enumerates the following areas in which state law is not preempted: “(1) [m]anner of qualifying as a candidate or political party organization; (2) [d]ates and places of election; (3) [v]oter registration … This language reflects the general principle established in the landmark case of Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v.

United States v. Luis Batista

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 30, 2025

After eligibility is established, we review a district court’s denial of an eligible defendant’s request for compassionate release under § 3582(c)(1)(A) for abuse of discre- tion. See id. … A district court abuses its discretion if it applies an in- correct legal standard, follows improper procedures in making the determination, or makes findings of fact that are clearly erroneous.