Case law

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.

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.

Construction Aggregate Transport, Inc. v. Florida Rock Industries, Inc.

710 F.2d 752 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 29, 1983

Clearly, Copper Liquor does not govern the case before this court Similarly, in Shumate & Co. v. … Such is clearly not the law in this circuit. See Terrell v.

Richard Hunstein v. Preferred Collection and Management Services, Inc.

17 F.4th 1016 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 28, 2021

“Factual allegations that establish a risk that is substantial, significant, or poses a realistic danger will clear this bar . . . .” Id. at 933. … Then-Judge Barrett explained that un- wanted telephone calls had long been deemed to qualify for the tort of intrusion upon seclusion. Gadelhak, 950 F.3d at 462.

Travis Clinton Hittson v. GDCP Warden

759 F.3d 1210 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 9, 2014

Nothing in Brecht implies, let alone clearly establishes, that state courts must apply Chapman on collateral review. … The testimony was admitted in violation of clearly established Supreme Court precedent. See Estelle, 451 U.S. at 471, 101 S. Ct. at 1877.

United States v. Christian A. Hansen

262 F.3d 1217 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 24, 2001

The district judge qualified him as an expert in the field of industrial hygiene.20 Id. at 194. … Because the instructions clearly set forth that a finding of “acted knowingly” was required for a conviction, there was no error in the instruction. 5.

Palm Beach County v. Federal Aviation Administration

53 F.4th 1318 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 18, 2022

And he asserted that compliance with ANCA “does not immunize an airport spon- sor from liability for violating” a grant assurance. The County filed a motion to dismiss Forman’s Part 16 complaint. … We think ANCA and its imple- menting regulations have “spoken clearly” that a restriction must be written to be in effect. See Barton, 904 F.3d at 1298.

United States v. McNair

605 F.3d 1152 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 12, 2010

In late 1999, the PRC changed the criteria, making it more difficult for other contractors to pre-qualify for “cured-in-place” work, and potentially delaying by two years the qualification of otherwise qualified contractors … Those do not establish any payment in July, whatsoever. They don’t establish any payment that’s been alleged in this case whatsoever. . . . He gave even another story while on the stand.

Chandler v. Miller

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 22, 1996

No candidate shall be allowed to qualify for nomination or election to a state office unless he or she presents such certificate.... … We think an audience would much more clearly perceive the intended message of one who burns a draft card than the message of one who declines to take a drug test. See generally Clark v.

United States v. Daniel Yanes Hernandez

356 F. App'x 279 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 10, 2009

As to Hernandez’s argument the magistrate judge failed to ascertain whether his attorney interpreted the plea agreement from English into Spanish properly or was qualified to do so, Hernandez has not pointed to any facts … The district court did not clearly err in finding Hernandez was not entitled to a minor-role reduction.

Conrad Joseph James, Jr. v. Freedom Mortgage Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 8, 2024

Finally, the court determined that Plaintiff had not established federal jurisdiction over any claims asserted in the com- plaint he sought to remove. … case sua sponte if the court determines that the case (1) is frivolous or malicious, (2) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or (3) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune

McKay v. United States

657 F.3d 1176 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 22, 2011

Archer, 531 F.3d at 1352 ("Here, where the Supreme Court [in Begay] has clearly set forth a new standard to evaluate which crimes constitute Violent felonies’ and 'crimes of violence,’ our prior panel precedent in Gilbert … Under section 2255, [a] prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress claiming the right to be released upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws

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)]."

United States v. Hayward Coleman

416 F. App'x 41 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 8, 2011

. § 3553(e) or the defendant qualifies for safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f). See United States v. Gomes, 621 F.3d 1343, 1346 (11th Cir. 2010). … We have also held that “the plain language of the statute [is] conclusive as clearly expressing legislative intent, unless the resulting application would be ‘absurd’ or ‘internal inconsistencies’ must be resolved.”

T-Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell, Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 21, 2026

We sua sponte directed the parties to discuss at oral argument “whether denial of a single permit qualifies as ‘the regulation of placement’” under the Act. … But the decision does not clearly do so. In Jones Intercable of San Diego, Inc. v.

O'Reilly v. Ceuleers

912 F.2d 1383 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 26, 1990

court should have abstained on the question of violation of the plan, and that as to the claim based upon an alleged breach of fiduciary duties, the state superintendent was not an ERISA "fiduciary." 72 The Levy case is clearly … Lewis ... establishes that the Director may not be considered a fiduciary for the purposes of ERISA.

Kanayo Derhem v. Bay House Miami Condominium Association

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 7, 2026

Because that remark requires an inference that Brumsted was referencing Derhem’s gender identity, it does not qualify as direct evidence. See Harris v. Pub. … The Association’s governing documents clearly allow for fines and suspensions to be imposed for those violations.

In re: John Ruthell Henry

757 F.3d 1151 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 17, 2014

Only when the Court has clearly dictated that a rule is retroactive will we so recognize it for purposes of § 2244(b)(2). … While these allegations do not clearly establish that Mr. Henry is intellectually disabled, they offer a basis finding that he is.

Capital Asset Research Corp. v. Roger Finnegan

216 F.3d 1268 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 30, 2000

Lauderdale, 810 F.2d 1551, 1555-56 (11th Cir. 1987) (“In order to qualify as a prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. §1988, the plaintiff must be successful on the central issue in the case, exhibited by the fact that the plaintiff … Examining the plaintiff’s assertion of prejudice there, the Engel court acknowledged that the defendant had not sought attorneys’ fees in its pleadings, but noted that the contract was in evidence and clearly provided that

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