Case law

George James Trepal v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

684 F.3d 1088 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 19, 2012

“We review de novo the district court’s decision about whether the state court acted contrary to clearly established federal law, unreasonably applied federal law, or made an unreasonable determination of fact.” … established Supreme Court precedent.

Vista Marketing, LLC v. Terri A. Burkett

812 F.3d 954 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 4, 2016

Vista relied on 18 U.S.C. § 2701 (a)(1) to establish Terri’s liability. … He added that Gjoen had initially established Vista’s email procedures.

Ronlad Vahey v. Philips Electronics North America Corporation

461 F. App'x 873 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 23, 2012

Bennett, 528 F.3d 823, 829 (11th Cir. 2008) (stating that “we are bound by the holdings of earlier panels unless and until they are clearly overruled en banc or by the Supreme Court”). … qualified to do the job, and (4) was replaced by . . . a younger individual.”

United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union AFL-CIO-CLC v. Wise Alloys, LLC

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 8, 2015

COLA offsets, if any, applies [sic] only to the contractually established weekly premium in the year in which the offset occurs. … In addition, section 3 qualifies the mandatory nature of any stay it authorizes by requiring a party to apply for the stay: “the court . . . shall on application of one of the parties stay the trial.” Id.

Rommell v. Automobile Racing Club of America, Inc.

964 F.2d 1090 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 6, 1992

Likewise, the fact that the manager of the Power Board knew that there was some construction going on at the plant was found to be inadequate to establish the knowledge required to establish wanton conduct. … Under the record presented in this case, we agree that plaintiff failed to meet his burden of establishing wanton conduct.

Martin E. O'Boyle v. Town of Gulf Stream

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 21, 2023

But there is no question that a state official who directly vi- olates a clearly established First Amendment right can be held lia- ble under section 1983. … See, e.g., Bennett, 423 F.3d at 1255 (deny- ing qualified immunity for officials who allegedly suppressed pro- tected political expression).

Robert Sharkey v. Food and Drug Administration

250 F. App'x 284 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 5, 2007

Therefore, we find that the Defendants have demonstrated 5 The report is CDC, Surveillance for Safety After Immunization: Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)–United States, 1991-2001, 52 Morbidity & … Our conclusion that market share and sales volume qualifies as confidential information is supported by Merck’s declaration detailing the drastic measures it takes to ensure this information remains confidential.

United States v. Yosany Sosa

777 F.3d 1279 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 2, 2015

Even if Sosa was a supervisor or manager only of Milian Martinez, that single underling is enough to qualify Sosa as a manager or supervisor under the Guidelines. Id. § 3B1.1 cmt. n.2. … Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in applying the sophisticated-means increase. Id. V.

Arabian American Oil Co. v. Scarfone

939 F.2d 1472 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 30, 1991

Aramco qualified the designers and contractors, entertained bids, assigned projects, and supervised construction. Aramco also paid the contractors, but was reimbursed by the Kingdom. … “[T]he exercise of discretion by the trial court will be disturbed only in extreme cases in which it clearly appears that the moving party was free of negligence.” Grunewald v.

James F. Lapinski v. St. Croix Condominium Association, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 21, 2018

The district court dismissed Lapinski’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on judicial immunity, sovereign immunity, and the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and for failure to state a claim under the Racketeer … A district court abuses its discretion by imposing sanctions only if the ruling is contrary to the law or involves a clearly erroneous finding of fact. Id. III.

United States v. Martavis Hollis Samuel

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2020

“To constitute an overruling for the purposes of this prior panel precedent rule, the Supreme Court decision must be clearly on point.” United States v. … In McFadden, the Court held that the government must “establish that the defendant knew he was dealing with a controlled substance” to convict him in prosecutions involving a controlled-substance analogue, such as bath

Mary E. Smith v. John E. Potter

310 F. App'x 307 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 3, 2009

A recommendation committee was established to review the applications and to submit a list of the “three best qualified” candidates to Paul T. Barrett, Postmaster of the Birmingham Post Office. … examines the “decision to grant or deny equitable relief for abuse of discretion, reviewing underlying questions of law de novo and findings of fact upon which the decision to grant equitable relief was made under the clearly

Bischoff v. Osceola County, FL

222 F.3d 874 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 14, 2000

Organizations qualified under s. 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and registered pursuant to chapter 496, or persons or organizations acting on their behalf are exempted from the provisions of this … Here, the district court was presented with clearly contradictory affidavits bearing directly on the central question of whether the Plaintiffs suffered an injury in fact sufficient to establish standing.

Cooper v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

646 F.3d 1328 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 21, 2011

Wood opined that the gunshot wounds were intermediate range shots, in the range of three to eight feet. 10  FBI Special Agent Robert Siebert testified as a qualified expert … Even affording that decision AEDPA-deference, we conclude it is contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as set out in Strickland.

Donald Roper v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

686 F. App'x 759 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 26, 2017

Roper has failed to establish “extraordinary circumstances” that warrant equitable tolling. 5 Holland, 560 U.S. at 649, 130 S. Ct. at 2562. … This finding was not clearly erroneous.

Thomas G. Brennan v. Kim Tobias Thomas

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 18, 2019

Douberly, 604 F.3d 1307, 1308 (11th Cir. 2010). 5 The magistrate judge also found that several of the individual defendants, including three medical providers employed by Corizon, were entitled to qualified immunity. … Because we hold that summary judgment was appropriate on other grounds, we need not consider whether the privately employed medical providers were entitled to qualified immunity. See Rowe v.

Arthur Frederick Goode, III v. Louie L. Wainwright

704 F.2d 593 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 2, 1983

The only evidence suggested by counsel for Goode which might qualify as nonstatutory mitigating evidence is evidence that Goode cooperated with the police and the prosecution. 10 Reply Brief of Appellant at 17-18. … If one or more aggravating circumstances are established, you should consider all the evidence tending to establish one or more mitigating circumstances and give that evidence such weight as you feel it should receive in

United States v. Somers

591 F. App'x 753 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 14, 2014

A review of the record shows that, on multiple occasions, Somers indicated to the district court that he desired to plead guilty, so long as the court found that he did not qualify for a sentencing enhancement under the … Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), “established that custodial interrogation cannot occur before a suspect is warned of [his] rights against self-incrimination.” United States v.

Pensacola Motor Sales Inc. v. Eastern Shore Toyota, LLC

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 21, 2012

Because the evidence supported the district court’s finding that Eastern Shore was not likely to infringe on the Bob Tyler trademark in the future, that finding is not clearly erroneous, there is a reasonable basis for … To qualify for that safe harbor, Eastern Shore must have had both a subjective belief and an objectively reasonable belief in the lawfulness of its actions.

Wooden v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

247 F.3d 1262 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 19, 2001

Green fails in this regard because he has not shown that he was otherwise qualified and then had his "bid" for admission subjected to a "tainted" admissions process.... … Defendants are plainly incorrect in their suggestion that "the predominant standard of review for this Article III 'standing' case is the 'clearly erroneous' standard of [Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a)]."