Case law

United States v. McLean

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 16, 1998

The record does not clearly demonstrate either the government’s initial theory of admissibility or the court’s rationale for admitting the Gucci Hole evidence. … It explained the relationship between McLean and the confidential informant Barbara and was vital to establishing her credibility.

United States v. Ronald Ryan Shepard, Jr.

154 F. App'x 849 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 17, 2005

To establish a violation of section 1343 the government must prove that the defendant “(1) intentionally participated in a scheme to defraud; and (2) used the mails to further that scheme.” United States v. … We cannot say that the conclusion of the district court that this conduct qualified Sheppard for the sophisticated means enhancement was clearly erroneous.

Howard Rosen v. Cascade International, Inc.

21 F.3d 1520 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 11, 1994

The court, in reaching its decision, explained that, "[a]lthough the suit in De Beers sought equitable relief, we think that the [decision] indicates that its teaching is clearly apposite to actions at law and, in particular … Therefore, "although a corporate director clearly qualifies as a controlling person, specific allegations of the director's participation are required in order to sustain a claim under section 20(a)."

Jesse L. Losey v. Tiffany Nail

596 F. App'x 783 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 2, 2015

Indeed, Losey himself now admits that he cannot clearly identify who was at the window during the attack. He did not see the officer’s face. … Goodman, 718 F.3d at 1329.3 3 Because Losey’s Eighth Amendment claim of deliberate indifference fails, Officer Nail has no need of qualified immunity, so we do not separately address it.

David A. Diehl v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 3, 2026

10616 Document: 41-1 Date Filed: 02/03/2026 Page: 3 of 12 24-10616 Opinion of the Court 3 The FTCA waives the United States’ sovereign immunity … Moreover, “a presumption of good faith attaches to an officer’s use of force . . . and an officer is liable for damages only when the force used is clearly excessive.”

21 Employee Benefits Cas. 2061, Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23938u, 11 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 695 Alexis M. Herman, Secretary of the United States Department of Labor v. Nationsbank Trust Company (Georgia), National Association, a National Banking Association, Sovran Capital Management Corporation, a Virginia Corporation Nationsbank of Georgia, N.A.

126 F.3d 1354 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 5, 1997

Partly in response to the takeover threat, Polaroid established an ESOP called the Polaroid Stock Equity Plan. 2 Eventually Polaroid named Citizens & Southern Trust Company, later known as NationsBank, as the trustee of the … Without that provision, the Polaroid ESOP would not qualify for tax benefits. See 26 U.S.C. § 409 (e).

John S. Lowman, IV v. Federal Aviation Administration

83 F.4th 1345 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 12, 2023

As discussed previously, “NEPA establishes procedures that a federal agency must follow before taking any action.” Van Antwerp, 526 F.3d at 1360. … FAA Order 1050.1F § 4-2(d)(3). 16 While the regulations clearly require a cumulative impacts analysis, they do not detail the required form of such analysis. Id.

United States v. Rogelio Barajas

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 26, 2018

And since the court did not clearly err in adopting these facts, it also correctly concluded that Barajas was more than a mere middleman -- the record established that Barajas actively recruited Cross into the conspiracy … “However, such an adjustment only makes sense analytically if the defendant can establish that h[is] role was minor as compared to the relevant conduct attributed to h[im].” Id. (emphasis omitted).

Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials, Inc. v. Gwinnett County Board of Registration and Elections

36 F.4th 1100 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 8, 2022

In other words, “the mere risk of future harm, standing alone, cannot qualify as a concrete harm— at least unless the exposure to the risk of future harm itself causes a separate concrete harm.” TransUnion LLC v. … The “English >” but- ton, which is a commonly used indicator of a website translation option, clearly represents the language in which the webpage ap- pears upon initially visiting the page and invites the viewer to see what

Madie E. Gainous v. Michael J. Astrue

402 F. App'x 472 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 9, 2010

Kaylie’s testimony establishes that she was disabled as a matter of law on her last date insured and thus is entitled to benefits. … Kaylie qualifies as a “treating physician” for the resolution of this appeal. The Commissioner argues that since Dr.

United States v. Taccarra Thomas

315 F. App'x 828 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 24, 2009

To determine whether a prima facie case has been established, 4 Batson v. … In this case, the district court did not clearly err when it increased Moon’s offense level for sophisticated means.

Ayanna Harrington v. Disney Regional Entertainment

276 F. App'x 863 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 19, 2007

First, an appellant must establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination. … To establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment, the appellants must show that (1) they were qualified members of a protected class, and (2) were subjected to an adverse employment action in contrast with similarly

Western Surety Company v. Penn J. Steuerwald

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 16, 2019

Lando, 437 F.3d 1067, 1074 (11th Cir. 2005) (denying motion to amend because the defendants were entitled to judicial immunity). See also Almanza v. … Fire Co., 885 F.2d 826, 830 (11th Cir. 1989), but we accept any factual findings the district court made in resolving the choice-of-law issue unless clearly erroneous. See Fioretti v. Mass. Gen. Life Ins.

Janssen Reynolds v. John Chapman

253 F.3d 1337 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 15, 2001

Cuyler establishes a two-part test that we use to evaluate whether an attorney is constitutionally ineffective due to a conflict of interest. … It is also well established in this circuit that a lawyer’s confidential knowledge and loyalties can be imputed to his current partners and employees. See United States v.

United States v. Demetrius Slydell

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 3, 2022

10177 Date Filed: 02/03/2022 Page: 3 of 8 21-10177 Opinion of the Court 3 Based on his admitted drug-trafficking conduct and the de- termination that Slydell qualified … The defendant bears the burden of establish- ing his mitigating role in the offense by a preponderance of the evidence. United States v. Cruickshank, 837 F.3d 1182, 1192 (11th Cir. 2016).

Leovel Peraza-Paz v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 9, 2021

The BIA determined equitable tolling was not warranted because Peraza-Paz did not establish he had exercised due diligence. … Date Filed: 09/09/2021 Page: 10 of 14 criminal law acknowledges that defendants were incapable of fairly defending their cases pro se and that immigration law is notoriously complex, the BIA’s suggestion he was qualified

Slater v. Energy Services Group International Inc.

441 F. App'x 637 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 23, 2011

A plaintiff may establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that: (1) she is a member of a group protected by Title VII; (2) she was qualified for the position or benefit sought; (3) she suffered an adverse … Thus, Slater has not established a prima facie case of pregnancy discrimination.

Ben and Audrey Delancy, as Co-Administrators and on Behalf of Estate of Dr. Herman Delancy v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.

947 F.2d 1536 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 6, 1991

As the foregoing discussion shows, Georgia law does not clearly require the insured to show that the insurer refused an offer within the policy limits to establish liability for tortious failure to settle, but it does not … Because Georgia law does not clearly support either the plaintiffs’ or St.

John Montford v. Federico A. Moreno

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 9, 2005

Thus, the district court “clearly indicated” that a subsequent amendment to the complaint was not possible. See id. … Third, Montford has not established that his case presents the exceptional circumstances required to appoint counsel for his civil claims. Accordingly, we AFFIRM. 23

Gerald Eugene Stano, Cross-Appellee v. Richard L. Dugger, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Cross-Appellant

921 F.2d 1125 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 2, 1991

Under Faretta and its progeny in this circuit, which establish the requirements for a valid waiver of the right to assistance of counsel, Stano clearly did not waive his right to counsel. … In the present case, the court clearly failed to satisfy either of these requirements.