Case law

Chidi Ahanotu v. The Retirement Board of Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL

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

The district court also held that Ahanotu had not adequately established any proper grounds for excusing his failure to exhaust. … But that attachment contains no description of injuries that would qualify for those benefits; all it does, in fact, is list his “Line of Duty Disabilities.” See Application at 4.

Cabalceta v. Standard Fruit Company

883 F.2d 1553 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 28, 1989

Id.; see also State Establishment for Agricultural Prod. Trading v. … The Vareka court was faced with reviewing whether the district court's finding that defendant Vareka's principal place of business was in Ecuador was clearly erroneous.

Ruperto Hernandez Zarate v. U.S. Attorney General

26 F.4th 1196 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 18, 2022

The Government confesses that it is ‘a term that is not clearly defined,’ . . . … Holder, 679 F.3d 1052, 1057 (8th Cir. 2012) (“The Su- preme Court established in [De George] that a crime in which fraud is an element is categorically a CIMT.”); Navarro-Lopez v.

Brent Berry v. Native American Services Corporation

109 F.4th 1297 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 25, 2024

“However, we also have stated clearly that, in a qui tam ac- tion, the enhanced pleading requirements of Rule 9(b) apply.” Marsteller, 880 F.3d at 1310. … “Where a concern fails to qualify or will no longer qualify as an eligible 8(a) Participant at any point during the 120 days prior to the end of the fifth year of the contract, the option shall not be exercised

United States v. Stevie Cavazos

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 1, 2019

We note that the district court is in a unique position to evaluate whether a defendant has accepted responsibility for his acts, and we will not set aside such a determination unless the facts in the record clearly establish … Here, the balance is clearly in favor of denying the reduction.

Speech First, Inc. v. Alexander Cartwright

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 21, 2022

Because this case hasn’t progressed past the pleading stage, “general factual allegations of injury” may suffice so long as they “plausibly and clearly allege a concrete in- jury.” Muransky v. … The policy, in short, is staggeringly broad, and any number of statements—some of which are undoubtedly protected by the First Amendment—could qualify for prohibition under its sweep- ing standards.

Kaswana A. Kelly v. Alabama Department of Revenue

638 F. App'x 884 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 15, 2016

) the claims against the ADR and the individual defendants in their official capacities are barred by the Eleventh Amendment; (2) the claims against the individual defendants in their individual capacities are barred by qualified … Specifically, the plain language of the TIA and this Court’s prior holdings clearly prohibit her claims for injunctive and declaratory relief.

United States v. Simpson

228 F.3d 1294 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 29, 2000

We review a district court’s determination of the quantity of drugs used to establish a base offense level for sentencing purposes under the clearly erroneous standard. See United States v. … Murphy’s trial testimony clearly established an illegal agreement between the two that began when Simpson propositioned Murphy in late 1995 to sell cocaine for him and then showed Murphy how to cut up the crack cocaine

Werner v. Commissioner of Social Security

421 F. App'x 935 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 21, 2011

. § 1383(c).1 After a hearing, the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) found Werner had some severe impairments but that these impairments did not rise to the level of a qualifying listed disability. … new evidence of the side effects generally associated with his medications present a reason to doubt the 5 ALJ’s conclusion.2 Mere lists of potential side effects do not establish

Adventure Outdoors, Inc. v. Michael Bloomberg

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

Court highlighted several factors that supported the exercise of jurisdiction in Grable: “The dispute there centered on the action of a federal agency (IRS) and its compatibility with a federal statute, the question qualified … The facts of this case clearly trigger the Hepps rule as expressed by the Supreme Court of Georgia in Mathis.

United States v. Kopituk

690 F.2d 1289 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 4, 1982

The evidence adduced at trial, however, was clearly sufficient to establish that Morales and Kopituk sought out the union officials and willingly agreed to make payoffs in return for lucrative waterfront business. … A reading of the transcript of Teitlebaum’s testimony, however, does not convey any such impression, for his testimony clearly established his own complicity in the criminal enterprise.

United States v. McBride

511 F.3d 1293 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 28, 2007

Defendant qualified for enhancements: (1) a two-level enhancement because the material involved a prepubescent minor; (2) a two-level enhancement because the offense involved distribution; (3) a four-level enhancement because … This Court has established a two-part process for district courts to determine an appropriate sentence following Booker.

United States v. Terry Carlton Lancaster

137 F. App'x 316 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 29, 2005

The district court did not clearly err when it found that Lancaster was a career offender. … The district court did not clearly err when it denied Lancaster’s request for an additional one-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility.

Sarah Jane Underwood v. Rita Harkins

698 F.3d 1335 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 18, 2012

When no Democrat qualified to run in the election, Ms. Harkins became the superior court clerk by having won the Republican primary. The primary contest in which Ms. Underwood and Ms. … We rejected, as clearly erroneous, the district court’s finding that a deputy clerk was a “policymaking” position within the meaning of Elrod .

United States v. Oral Roger Russell

994 F.3d 1230 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 15, 2021

The PSR found that Russell qualified as a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. … First, Jones makes clear that Russell’s offense—possessing with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of crack cocaine—qualifies as a covered offense. See Jones, 962 F.3d at 1303.

Roger Collins v. Robert O. Francis, Warden, Ga. Diagnostic and Classification Center

728 F.2d 1322 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 15, 1984

Styles was not indicted; he was granted immunity and became a prosecu *1328 tion witness. Before the trial began, the court held a Jaekson-Denno hearing on Collins’ motion to suppress his two statements. … The review given in this case clearly was not unconstitutional. IV.

Audrey Shaps v. Provident Life & Accident Insurance Company, Provident Life and Casualty Insurance Company, a Foreign Corporation

244 F.3d 876 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 28, 2001

The policy defines “Physician” as “any legally qualified physician.” … Shaps has failed to demonstrate that the district court clearly abused its discretion in admitting this evidence.

Jhonny Calderon v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 21, 2020

Ct. 2319 (2019), 1 established a new constitutional right that is retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review? 2. … Therefore, even relying solely on the Shepard6 documents, the district court did not clearly err in finding there was no uncertainty that Calderon’s § 924(c) conviction was supported by his offenses 6

John B. Rice v. Comm'r IRS

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 27, 2009

Accordingly, the Tax Court did not err in finding that the Commissioner’s proposed facts were deemed stipulated nor clearly err in finding the amount of the deficiency and penalties. … An appellant must show prejudice to establish a due process violation. See Brown v.

Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. USA

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 15, 2013

According to the Corps, those easements essentially rendered it immune from the Tribe’s suit for injunctive relief from the flooding of tribal lands. … We disagree; the interests obviously qualify as a property entitled to procedural due process protection.