Case law

Kerry Dexter Summers v. Donald C. Winter

303 F. App'x 716 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 16, 2008

Under this framework, the plaintiff may establish a prima facie case of “an ADEA violation . . . by showing that he (1) was a member of the protected age group, (2) was subjected to adverse employment action, (3) was qualified … Summers clearly met the first and third requirements of the McDonnell Douglas analysis. He was 59 years old at the time he participated in the training, within the age group protected by the ADEA.

Ernest Cadet v. State of Florida Department of Corrections

742 F.3d 473 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 31, 2014

It also provides: “[T]he fact that an action taken by an agent has unfavorable results for the principal does not establish that the agent acted adversely.” Id., cmt. c. … At the same time, the Court’s opinion does not set forth a clearly discernible standard which we may use to determine whether a petitioner has demonstrated “that some extraordinary circumstance stood in his way.”

Allapattah Services, Inc. v. Exxon Corp.

333 F.3d 1248 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 11, 2003

Thus, we find that § 1367 clearly and unambiguously provides district courts with the authority in diversity class actions to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the claims of class members who do not meet the minimum … After the hearing, at which the court heard testimony from both parties’ expert witnesses, it entered a lengthy order determining that (1) both parties’ expert witnesses were qualified to testify; (2) the methodologies of

United States v. Derrick Fitgerald Dial

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 13, 2024

We held that the challenge was foreclosed by Rozier, which “interpreted Heller as limiting the [Second Amend- ment] right to law-abiding and qualified individuals and as clearly excluding felons from … Under our prior panel precedent rule, an “in- tervening Supreme Court decision abrogates our precedent only if the intervening decision is both clearly on point and clearly con- trary to our earlier decision

Jorge O. Arevalo v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 6, 2017

. § 1182(a)(2)(A) (establishing that an alien who has committed a crime involving moral turpitude is generally inadmissible). … DISCUSSION The BIA clearly and directly addressed the legal question at issue here in its published, precedential opinion Matter of Y-N-P-, 26 I & N Dec. 10 (BIA 2012).

Sikkander Subjali Chacku v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 19, 2008

The BIA stated that, pursuant to INA 1 Although the term “priorty date” is not clearly defined by statute or caselaw, an alien’s priority date is the date on which his labor certification is approved, … at which point he is permitted to file an I-140 “Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker” form to establish his eligibility to file the I- 485 form.

Andrew Pretka v. Kolter City Plaza II, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 8, 2010

See Lowery, 483 F.3d at 1213 n.63 (“Under either paragraph, the documents received by the defendant must contain an unambiguous statement that clearly establishes federal jurisdiction.”). … The Lowery opinion also misreads the two decisions it cites for its statement that, “[u]nder either paragraph, the documents received by the defendant must contain an unambiguous statement that clearly establishes federal

United States v. Linda Ann Borden

269 F. App'x 903 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 13, 2008

The district court also did not clearly err by enhancing Borden’s sentence under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c). … The commentary further states that: “To qualify for an adjustment . . . , the defendant must have been the organizer . . . of one or more other participants.” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 cmt. n.2.

United States v. Libardo De Jesus Parra-Gonzalez

329 F. App'x 887 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 21, 2009

The 4 government also “must establish the quantity of drugs by the preponderance of the evidence.” United States v. Ismond, 993 F.2d 1498, 1499 (11th Cir. 1993). … “There can, of course, be more than one person who qualifies as a leader or organizer of a criminal association or conspiracy.” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 cmt. (n.4).

In Re: Bellsouth Corporation, in Re: Terry Price and Lehr, Middlebrooks, Price & Proctor, P.C.

334 F.3d 941 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 17, 2003

However, we also believe that Robinson clearly evinces concerns relevant to this case. … In sum, Price and LMPP have not only failed to establish, with sufficient clarity to meet mandamus standards, the dire consequences to their practice that they assert in eonclusory fashion, but they have also failed to establish

United States v. Lawrence Alexander

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 24, 2026

Alexander argues that the government failed to establish that he had any knowledge of the criminal objective attributed to Waxman. … Thus, the district court’s factual finding is clearly erroneous. Accordingly, we vacate the restitution award. prove reliance.

United States v. Wesner Jean-Pierre

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 3, 2025

The District Court did not clearly err in determining the loss amount. … did not establish that WJP clients are eligible for FTCs at the national rate.

Bertha Morrison v. Washington County, Alabama

700 F.2d 678 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 17, 1983

Someone must necessarily make a decision in accord with an established standard or criteria. In this instance the hospital argues that it relied solely upon Dr. … In the case at bar the alleged deprivation was caused in part by persons for whom the state is clearly responsible — the hospital staff and county police.

Kobleur v. Group Hospitalization & Medical Services, Inc.

954 F.2d 705 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 1992

The FEHBA gives OPM the authority to administer the program by contracting with qualified private carriers to offer a variety of health care plans, 5 U.S.C. § 8902 , by distributing information on the available plans to eligible … Thus, “the establishment of administrative review was for the benefit of the claimant, not for insurance companies to preclude a claimant’s judicial recourse.” Id. at 1216 .

Richard L Sealey v. Warden GDCP.

954 F.3d 1338 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2020

Puente is one of the test’s developers, and that, as a neuropsychologist, he is more qualified than the state’s expert, a forensic psychologist. … Accordingly, the state court’s decision that Sealey suffered no prejudice as a result of his counsel’s failure to present Tutein was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Ronald Marlteiz Curry v. Grant Culliver

141 F. App'x 832 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 15, 2005

The Kirby decision clearly vitiates this finding, as it held that a trial court has jurisdiction under § 13A-5-9.1 to consider a prisoner’s motion for sentence reduction and to determine whether a prisoner qualifies for … Because Curry’s claim that he is entitled to a sentence reduction under Alabama state law provides no basis for federal habeas corpus relief, we affirm the denial of this § 2254 claim.2 Moreover, Kirby now establishes an

United States v. Sorga Suarez

364 F. App'x 602 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 9, 2010

“To establish plain error, a defendant must show there is (1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that affects substantial rights.” Id. at 1019. … Agent Hammond also testified that in 2001, Suarez transferred over $1 million in federal grant and loan funds, which were supposed to be distributed to qualified students for living expenses, into her personal bank accounts

Marcellus Henderson v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 10, 2025

The Supreme Court has established a “categorial approach” to determine whether a predicate offense is a “crime of violence” under the elements clause. Alvarado-Linares v. … (“[A] conviction for armed bank robbery clearly meets the requirement for an underlying felony offense, as set out in § 924(c)(3)(A).”).

United States v. Tate

586 F.3d 936 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 30, 2009

when he was adjudicated to be a delinquent for committing criminal mischief in the Allegheny County Juvenile Court, in 4 Tate had objected to paragraph 80 of the presentence investigation report which qualified … failing to calculate (or improperly calculating) the Guidelines range, treating the Guidelines as mandatory, failing to consider the § 3553(a) factors, selecting a sentence based on clearly

Zuzanna Juris v. Inamed Corporation

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.”