Case law

Wilbert Price v. M&H Valve Company

177 F. App'x 1 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 7, 2006

that he was minimally qualified for a supervisory position. … “A plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discriminatory failure to promote by showing that (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified and applied for the promotion, (3) he was rejected despite his

United States v. Ambert

561 F.3d 1202 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 6, 2009

But, as the district court clearly 7 recognized, the indictment was based in part on Ambert’s travel from Florida to California and back on July 9-11, 2007, well after the effective … In Dumont, a sex offender convicted of a qualifying offense before July 27, 2006, and who had traveled in interstate travel prior to February 28, 2007, was successfully prosecuted for failure to register as a sex offender

Blake Warner v. Hillsborough County Clerk of Courts

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 17, 2026

See 471 U.S. at 104 (noting that the “power to qualify existing property rights is particularly broad with respect to the ‘character’ of the property rights at issue” in that case). … It clearly defines conditions under which property is abandoned, and there is no dis- pute that those conditions were met here.

Vivian Hatcher v. Board of Public Education and Orphanage for Bibb County

809 F.2d 1546 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 17, 1987

Hatcher clearly qualifies as a tenured principal under Georgia law. Her rights as a tenured principal extended to not being demoted except by the specified procedures *1552 and for the specified reasons. … Moreover, the individual interest in having such hearings is minimal because in many situations, as in this case, the Board is simply forced to make a choice between two or more equally qualified tenured teachers.

EEOC v. Total System Services, Inc.

221 F.3d 1171 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 7, 2000

Although a literal interpretation of the provision would not allow for such a claim, Judge Posner reasoned that, were § 2000e-3 held not to apply, “the result would be that employers could obtain immunity from the retaliation … The words “under this subchapter” appear at the end of the participation clause;2 and therefore, the qualifying phrase “under this subchapter” applies only to the immediately preceding clause: the participation clause protects

United States v. Roland Mathis

239 F. App'x 513 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 14, 2007

Proffer Agreement Mathis next asserts statements made to the Government under a proffer agreement should have been excluded pursuant to derivative-use immunity. … The district court ruled that because the Government did not grant Mathis any immunity related to the proffer, a Kastigar hearing was unnecessary. We agree.

United States v. Justo Jonah Santos

947 F.3d 711 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 9, 2020

The policy does not require an adjudications officer to confirm answers when the questions clearly do not pertain to the applicant. … the burden is on the applicant to establish his eligibility for naturalization.

Ricky D. Adkins v. Warden, Holman CF

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 27, 2013

It is thus abundantly clear that this principle is clearly established federal law. … Batson clearly established that the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals was required to consider all relevant circumstances in making its ultimate factual determination.

United States v. Hernan Prada

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 27, 2024

He argues that his suppressed immune system and the presence of COVID-19 in his facility were extraordinary and compelling conditions warranting his release and that he was a nonviolent offender who had … Here, the Government’s position is clearly correct as a mat- ter of law.

Bellsouth Telecommunications v. Town of Palm Beach

252 F.3d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 25, 2001

But if the statute or ordinance in question does not meet these criteria, the state or local government has not “violated” the subsections; rather, the particular regulation is not immune from preemption as an exception to … Fortunately, the legislative history pertaining to subsection (d) clearly indicates Congress’s intentions when it drafted subsection (d). The Act began as Senate Bill 652 in the 104th Congress.

Key Enterprises of Delaware, Inc. v. Venice Hospital, Sammett Corporation and Medicare Patient Aids Center, Gulf Area Diversified Services

919 F.2d 1550 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 28, 1990

‘But the word “right” is one of the most deceptive of pitfalls; it is so easy to slip from a qualified meaning in the premise to an unqualified one in the conclusion. Most rights are qualified.’ ” Lorain Journal Co. v. … The word “induce” clearly contemplates conduct short of an absolute command. The commentators take this a step further.

Edward Eugene Penn v. Attorney General of the State of Alabama, John E. Nagle

930 F.2d 838 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 6, 1991

The petitioners are entitled to obtain in these suits refund of the excess of taxes exacted from them. 12 Although writing in the context of taxation, Justice Brandéis clearly expressed a preference for tangible relief to … gender-based disparate treatment of spouses of railroad employees; "the Board suggests that we should hold that all spouses, female as well as male, of railroad employees must prove that they are dependent in fact in order to qualify

United States v. Trujillo

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 1998

This two-level adjustment made Fuentes ineligible to qualify for the Safety Valve Provision under section 5C1.2 or the downward departure in section 2D1.1. … We hold that the district court's finding was not clearly erroneous. See, e.g., United States v. Hansley, 54 F.3d 709, 716 (11th Cir.)

Chester McCoy v. United States

266 F.3d 1245 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 25, 2001

In order to qualify under Teague’s second exception, the new rule “ ‘must not only improve accuracy [of trial], but also alter our understanding of the bedrock procedural elements essential to the fairness of a proceeding … Bousley, 523 U.S. at 623 , 118 S.Ct. 1604 (“As we clearly stated in Engle v.

United States v. Askins & Miller Orthopaedics, P.A.

924 F.3d 1348 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 23, 2019

By contrast, to obtain an injunction, the plaintiff must “establish by a preponderance of the evidence that this form of equitable relief is necessary.” Sheely, 505 F.3d at 1182 n.10. … The differences between that case and this one announce themselves rather clearly.

Dwight Johannes Downs v. U.S. Army Corps.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 4, 2009

Even this definition contains terms that are not clearly defined, including “containing,” “consisting of,” and “abounding.” … We find that all such terms are insufficiently concrete to clearly define a quantity, particularly “zero.”

Askari Abdullah Muhammad v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 23, 2013

Indeed, the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in this case was neither contrary to nor an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); Evans v. … In order to qualify as an “adequate” procedural ground, the state rule must be “firmly established and regularly followed.” Walker v. Martin, _ U.S. _, 131 S. Ct. 1120, 1127 (2011).

United States v. Samuel Storey

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 8, 2025

Storey’s cocaine offenses clearly occurred on different occa- sions. … See Laines, 69 F.4th at 1234 (rejecting the argument that Chamu established “that the govern- ment ha[d] not yet met its burden to show” that the prior Florida conviction “qualifie[d] as a predicate

United States v. Belfast

611 F.3d 783 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 15, 2010

Statements as to fault would not ordinarily qualify under this latter language. … A prima facie case of authenticity was established for the rap lyrics in two ways.

Int'l Brotherhood v. NLRB

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 13, 1997

The group ultimately decided that either Jonjock had intentionally committed these errors or that he was so lacking in skills he could not qualify as a boilermaker fitter/rigger. … We note, however, that although our review is limited, that does not mean that "the Board is immune from judicial examination and reversal in proper cases....