Case law

United States v. Orestes Hernandez

107 F.4th 965 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 8, 2024

First, like the interpretive can- ons, “background principles,” no matter how well established, can’t control or contradict clear statutory text. Cf. … I’ve also been unable to establish the Majority Opinion’s premise.

James T. Williams v. Fred P. Wright, Jr., Individually and as Liquidating Trustee of Wright Pest Control Co. Of South Carolina, Inc.

927 F.2d 1540 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 11, 1991

An employer’s decision to establish a plan is entirely voluntary, but once a plan is established, Congress wanted to “mak[e] sure that if a worker has been promised a defined pension benefit upon retirement— and if he has … Finally, a number of opinion letters issued by the Department of Labor confirm that a plan that otherwise qualifies for ERISA coverage will not be excluded because it covers only a single employee.

Internaves de Mexico S.A. de C v. v. Andromeda Steamship Corporation

898 F.3d 1087 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 1, 2018

Inside Box 25, the parties clearly wrote these words: “London arbitration, English Law.” … Further, “[w]hen general propositions in a contract are qualified by the specific provisions, the rule of construction is that the specific provisions in the agreement control.” Goldberg v.

Capone v. Aetna Life Insurance

592 F.3d 1189 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 5, 2010

However, it makes no difference because we hold that under the facts of this case, it appears Capone would qualify under either reading. D. … Capone established that several other individuals were diving from the dock in a contemporaneous fashion.

United States v. Yuri Izurieta

710 F.3d 1176 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 22, 2013

The regulation at issue, 19 C.F.R. § 141.113(c), is clearly a substantive regulation establishing obligations for importers. … The regulation fails to qualify as a Alaw@ for purposes of criminal liability under 18 U.S.C. § 545 not because it has no effect as a law but because that law is civil only, and in particular reflects contractual requirements

Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Alabama Department of Revenue

550 F.3d 1306 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 11, 2008

I Though Norfolk is a Virginia railway corporation, it is qualified to do business in Alabama and has approximately a one-third market share among Alabama rail carriers. … Congress could clearly have prohibited such exemptions, but did not. Id. at 344.

United States v. Charis Mapson

96 F.4th 1323 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 21, 2024

McNeil, 627 F.3d 823, 832 (11th Cir. 2010) (“It is well-established that a jury may believe a witness’[ ] testimony in whole or in part.”). … Tier- zah concedes that the government presented sufficient evidence to establish her sisters’ violent intent, but not hers.

United States v. Jason P. Stinson

661 F. App'x 945 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 14, 2016

Situated in low-income areas, his stores directly target customers who are “underprivileged, undereducated poor people who [may] qualify for the Earned Income Tax Credit [(“EITC”)].” … Unlike the Tenth Circuit, however, we do not have a modified likelihood-of-success standard, and we have always required each of the four preliminary-injunction elements to be “clearly established” before imposing the “drastic

Leonard J. Klay v. Humana, Inc.

382 F.3d 1241 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 1, 2004

These issues are clearly predominant over the only issue arguably common to the class—whether Motel 6 has a practice or policy of racial discrimination. Id. … plaintiff a less advantageous account, or cancelled the plaintiff’s account, but also 25  whether the particular plaintiff was of the age required by Avis to qualify

Sebastian Cordoba v. DIRECTV, LLC

942 F.3d 1259 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 15, 2019

The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing each element. Id. … Hanna, 936 F.3d 1162 (11th Cir. 2019), that the receipt of a single unsolicited text message does not qualify as an injury in fact does not change our analysis.

Nicholas Hernandez v. Sheriff of Manatee County, Florida

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 14, 2025

And second, the deputies asserted that they were entitled to qualified immunity because, even if they vio- lated the Constitution, their actions did not result in behavior that was clearly established … The district court agreed that the deputies were entitled to qualified immunity and dismissed Hernandez’s claims. Hernandez appeals the dismissal.

United States v. Omar Josue Morales-Rodriguez

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 22, 2025

He argues that the district court clearly erred when it determined that he qualified for an aggravating-role enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b). … When a defendant challenges one of the factual bases of his sentence, the government has the burden of establishing the dis- puted fact by a preponderance of the evidence. United States v.

Edward W. Jenkins v. National Waterworks, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 20, 2012

Here, NWI conceded for purposes of summary judgment that Jenkins could establish his prima facie case. … Thus, Jenkins did not show that he was more qualified than Gurski, much less that he was so much more qualified that no reasonable person would have chosen Gurski over him. See Springer, 509 F.3d at 1349.

United States v. Karamchand Doobay

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 28, 2022

He again argued that, because of the pandemic, his medical conditions (specifically, his asthma and hypertension) created a health risk that qualified as an extraordinary and compelling reason to release him. … Summary affirmance is warranted when one of the parties is so “clearly right as a matter of law” that “there can be no substantial question as to the outcome of the case.” Groendyke Transp., Inc. v.

Alvin Bernard Ford v. Charles G. Strickland, Jr., Warden, Florida State Penitentiary, Louie L. Wainwright, Secty., Dept. Of Offender Rehabilitation, Florida, and Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Florida, Respondents- Alvin Bernard Ford, or Connie Ford, Individually, and Acting as Next Friend on Behalf of Alvin Bernard Ford v. Louie L. Wainwright, Secretary, Department of Corrections, State of Florida

734 F.2d 538 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 30, 1984

There is a well-established distinction in the case law, see Sanders v. … Such actions would fall more clearly under Rule 9(a) of the Rules governing Sec. 2254 cases, allowing dismissal of delayed petitions if the State's ability to respond is impaired.

Michel A. Padilla v. Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration

662 F. App'x 743 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 20, 2016

The FAA Administrator issues “airman certificates” to qualified individuals, which are akin to driver’s licenses for pilots. 49 U.S.C. § 44703(a). … Coast Guard, 788 F.2d 705, 709 n.5 (11th Cir. 1986) (“The [agency’s] guideline clearly was intended to confer a procedural benefit and therefore, under the American Farm Lines framework, no inquiry into substantial prejudice

United States v. Roy M. Belfast, Jr.

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.

United States v. Eric Rondell Gabe

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 2, 2026

“After eligibility is established, we review a district court’s denial of a prisoner’s § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for abuse of discretion.” Id. … Amongst the conditions that qualify as “extraordinary and compelling reasons,” the Sentencing Guidelines state that the dis- trict court may find a sentence reduction is warranted if a defend- ant received

Dr. Bernd Wollschlaeger v. Governor of the State of Florida

814 F.3d 1159 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 14, 2015

Although this speech is also uttered by a professional, it clearly does not constitute “professional speech.” … Despite existing privacy laws and security technology, neither government agencies nor private actors have been immune from this threat.

United States v. Carlos Alberto Morilla

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 11, 2026

We accept a district court’s factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous. United States v. Barner, 572 F.3d 1239, 1247 (11th Cir. 2009). … The stipulated facts establish that Morilla laun- dered approximately $550,000 in drug proceeds over the course of roughly one month through three separate wire transfers to an un- dercover agent.