Case law

United States v. Fabio Ochoa-Vasquez

428 F.3d 1015 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 20, 2005

Thus, we held that the press and public’s qualified First Amendment right to access criminal proceedings extends to the proceedings’ docket sheets. … We therefore cannot say that the district court’s findings on the Batson issue are clearly erroneous.

Meagher v. Dugger

861 F.2d 1242 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 19, 1988

This case is clearly different from McElroy v. … In summary, we hold that the facts of this case establish sufficient cause and prejudice under the test of Wainwright v. Sykes, supra, to warrant escape from procedural default.

United States v. Levy

374 F.3d 1023 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 23, 2004

Levy asserts that the district court assumed a prosecutor role in establishing the facts necessary for the vulnerable victim enhancement. We disagree. … Rather, Kozyak was quite familiar with the details of the investment *1035 scheme and the victims were imminently qualified to speak about their experiences relating to the scheme.

Burr & Forman v. Blair

470 F.3d 1019 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 27, 2006

The Anti-Injunction Act’s animus is clearly rooted in federalism concerns — a desire to avoid tension and preserve comity between the federal and state courts. See Toucey v. New York Life Ins. … We find an abuse of discretion if the district court "applies an incorrect legal standard, follows improper procedures in making the determination, or makes findings of fact that are clearly erroneous."

United States v. Louis Rinchack

820 F.2d 1557 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 1987

A check of registrations at area motels established that Gasper had recently checked into the local Holiday Inn. … Schnell’s reports reflect, Rinchack also claims to suffer from physiological brain damage, dizziness, seizures, disorientation, and an inability to think clearly.

United States v. Kelly Ray Jones

200 F. App'x 915 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 17, 2006

Butts provided a qualified advisory opinion that Jones was not competent, it was not clearly erroneous for the district court to favor the more comprehensive report from Dr. … about the waiver during the plea colloquy, or (2) the record clearly shows that the defendant otherwise understood the full significance of the waiver.’”

Arthur Leroy Smith v. BellSouth Telecommunications

273 F.3d 1303 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 27, 2001

After examining the language of the FMLA and comparing it to similar statutes, the First Circuit decided that the term “employee” was ambiguous and was not clearly limited to current employees. Id. at 9. … To establish a prima facie case of retaliation, a plaintiff must show that he engaged in statutorily protected conduct, he suffered adverse action, and there is a causal connection between the protected conduct and the

Ewin Oscar Martinez v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 21, 2021

He can overcome this procedural bar only by establishing cause and actual prejudice or actual innocence. Id. … Because Martinez cannot establish both cause and prejudice, his only way around procedural default is by establishing actual innocence.

Canup v. Chipman-Union, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 8, 1997

Hobby, 506 U.S. 103, 111, 113 S.Ct. 566, 573, 121 L.Ed.2d 494 (1992) ("[T]o qualify as a prevailing party, a civil rights plaintiff must obtain at least some relief on the merits of his claim.... … We would expect Congress to speak more clearly if it intended such a radical change in the application and understanding of its fee shifting statutes.

Greater Birmingham Ministries v. Secretary of State for the State of Alabama

105 F.4th 1324 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 26, 2024

He argues that only those updates carried out to satisfy a different part of the Act, § 20507(a)(4), would qualify for disclosure. … Half a dozen other subsections in § 20507 also define, narrow, or qualify their statutory commands by referencing other subsections.

Baran v. Beaty

526 F.3d 1340 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 9, 2008

Baran has not shown the district court clearly erred by crediting 2 Beaty’s testimony. Consequently, we draw the following facts from the district court’s findings of fact. … Baran did not propose a specific safety plan for Samuel, suggest Samuel would qualify for protective services were he to be returned to Australia, or indicate how his sister (who once told Beaty that Baran’s abuse was “none

Claudia Dwyer v. Ethan Allen Retail, Inc.

325 F. App'x 755 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 15, 2009

The district court determined that Dwyer was a qualified person with a disability under the ADA and that Burton harbored a discriminatory animus towards Dwyer. … Contrary to Dwyer’s assertion, her acts amounted to more than a “mere referral;” she facilitated the order to the outside workroom, clearly a Policy violation.

United States v. Richard Anthony Badolato, Dean Quarnstrom, and Richard Vaughn

701 F.2d 915 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 1, 1983

The DEA agents were acting solely as government informants, and are effectively granted immunity for acting upon the instructions of the Attorney General. Cf. 21 U.S. … Moreover, the agents clearly withdrew from the conspiracy while Quarnstrom did nothing to defeat its furtherance.

Kenny A. Ex Rel. Winn v. Perdue

532 F.3d 1209 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 3, 2008

That finding is clearly erroneous. … The prior panel precedent rule clearly forecloses their position.”); Wascura v.

Rosa H. Prince v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration

551 F. App'x 967 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 2, 2014

Finally, once a claimant establishes that he cannot perform his past relevant work due to some severe impairment, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to show that significant numbers of jobs exist in the national economy … “A clearly articulated credibility finding with substantial supporting evidence in the record will not be disturbed by a reviewing court.” Foote v.

Thai Meditation Association of Alabama, Inc. v. City of Mobile, Alabama

83 F.4th 922 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 2, 2023

The Su- preme Court recently clarified these two principles: A government policy will not qualify as neutral if it is “specifically directed at . . . religious practice.” . . . … While it is still uncertain at this stage whether the City’s planning decision is a substantial burden on TMAA’s rights, it clearly is a bur- den.

Magda Pizzini v. Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security

495 F. App'x 991 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 8, 2012

Finally, the content of Pizzini’s performance reviews is not sufficient to qualify as a materially adverse action. … A plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that: “(1) she belongs to a protected class; (2) she was qualified to do the job; (3) she was subjected to adverse employment action; and (4) her

United States v. Jamaal A. Hameen

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 18, 2023

To overrule a prior decision, the Supreme Court or en banc decision must be clearly on point. Id. … F.3d 1270, 1273 (11th Cir. 2001) (holding that “the jurisdic- tional element of the statute, i.e., the requirement that the felon ‘possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition,’ immunizes

Schiavo v. Schiavo

404 F.3d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 30, 2005

Schiavo and that have been compounded by the resulting passionate inter-family struggle and media focus certainly qualify as "hard facts." … Clearly, application of that doctrine should have been made in this case, the effect of which would have been to decline to exercise any jurisdiction that we or the district court did have under the ADA, the Civil Rights

Marlon B. Slater v. United States

175 F. App'x 300 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 10, 2006

“It is well established that the FTCA is a specific waiver of the sovereign 8 immunity of the United States and must be strictly construed.” Phillips v. … “The FTCA establishes that as a prerequisite to maintaining a suit against the United States, a plaintiff must present notice of the claim to the appropriate federal agency.” Brown v.