Case law

Nicola Hudson v. Tyson Farms, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 29, 2019

“To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADA, a plaintiff must show: (1) [she] is disabled; (2) [she] is a qualified individual; and (3) [she] was subjected to unlawful discrimination because of her … Thus, Hudson has failed to prove that her asthma qualifies as a disability under the ADA. V.

Ganesh Bahadur-Chhetri v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 6, 2020

Att’y Gen., 492 F.3d 1223, 1233 (11th Cir. 2007) (concluding intentionally being shot at in a moving car multiple times qualifies as past persecution). … “An act that results in unanticipated or unintended severity of pain and suffering” does not qualify as torture. Id.

John Phillips v. Aaron Rents, Inc.

262 F. App'x 202 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 11, 2008

Race and Sex Discrimination A plaintiff can establish a prima facie case of race or sex discrimination by showing that: (1) he was a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified to do the job; (3) he was subjected … In determining whether or not an employee has been replaced, we consider the employee’s position and responsibilities, and whether those features of the job were clearly defined. Hawkins v.

In re: Charles Therion Clayton

829 F.3d 1254 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 18, 2016

Warden Coleman FCI (Medium), 709 F.3d 1328 (11th Cir. 2013) , that a conviction under Florida’s aggravated assault statue qualifies as a violent felony to the post-Johnson context without analyzing whether it qualifies … 2255 motion “should simply be whether [an inmate’s] sentence was based on crimes that met ACCA’s ‘violent felony’ definition before Johnson but no longer do,” and noting that the answer “should be ‘no’ only if a sentence clearly

Nancy L. Barnette v. Federal Express Corproation

491 F. App'x 176 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 9, 2012

On appeal, Barnette also points to other evidence in the record that she argues establishes a prima facie case when viewed cumulatively. … Yet the record clearly reveals that FedEx policy required employees to immediately report accidents or incidents. Proctor Hosp., 562 U.S. __, 131 S. Ct. 1186 (2011).

Johnny L. Mathis v. Leggett & Platt

263 F. App'x 9 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 15, 2008

In order to establish a prima facie case for sex discrimination under Title VII, Mathis must demonstrate that: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he suffered an adverse employment action; (3) he was qualified … Furthermore, the reason for firing Mathis is clearly his subsequent, post-complaint violations of the company’s attendance policy.4 3.

Andrew Spear v. Milton E. (Buddy) Nix, Jr.

215 F. App'x 896 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 29, 2007

McGhan Medical Corp., 184 F.3d 1300, 1317 n.17 (11th Cir. 1999) (“Issues that are not clearly outlined in an appellant’s initial brief are deemed abandoned.”). … Establishment of a parole system does not automatically create a liberty interest in parole; “[o]nly when a state maintains a parole system that creates a legitimate expectation of parole does it [also] establish a liberty

Liu Yanni v. U.S. Attorney General

707 F. App'x 697 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 1, 2017

§ 1158(a)(2)(D); see also 8 C.F.R. § 208.4(a)(5) (identifying events that qualify as extraordinary circumstances). … To qualify for withholding of removal, an applicant must establish that her “life or freedom would be threatened in [his] country because of the alien’s race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group

Daniel Gilroy v. R. Sean Baldwin

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 29, 2021

Any person who, under color of law, deprives any citizen of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured. 42 U.S.C. § 1983. … The Charter also establishes a “civil service appeals board.” Id., § 82(a).

United States v. Rodney L. Simms

385 F.3d 1347 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 27, 2004

To establish a violation under Brady v. … It is consistently held that the rule permits introduction only of additional material that is relevant and is necessary to qualify, explain, or place into context the portion already introduced.” United States v.

Richardson v. INS

162 F.3d 1338 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 22, 1998

Although nothing in the record clearly establishes that the basis of the immigration judge’s decision was a lack of jurisdiction, both parties agree that the immigration judge did not conduct a bond hearing, although witnesses … For example, INA § 240(c)(2)(A) provides that an alien has the burden of establishing eligibility for admission “clearly and beyond doubt” or “by clear and convincing evidence that the alien is lawfully present in the United

Mincey v. Turpin

206 F.3d 1106 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 16, 2000

These determinations by the trial court were not clearly erroneous and we must therefore accept them. … This action clearly violates Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963).

United States v. Natoya Mashea Handy

592 F. App'x 893 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 30, 2015

On appeal, Handy does not dispute that social security numbers qualify as access devices or that her offense affected interstate commerce. 12 Handy has not shown error, let alone plain error, in the denial of her motion … To the extent that the 73 individuals’ social security numbers were “used” in fraudulent schemes, the individuals clearly qualified as “victims” for purposes of § 2B1.1(b)(2). See U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 cmt. n.4(E). B.

Gilmere v. City Of Atlanta

864 F.2d 734 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 6, 1989

The court found that a large portion of the trial and the expert's testimony was directed at establishing the City's liability. … The facts and legal theories necessary to establish the City's liability were distinctly different from the facts and theories necessary to establish the liability of Craig and Sampson.

Brian Bevan v. Lee County SO

213 F. App'x 824 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 5, 2007

Here, the magistrate judge did not abuse her discretion by failing to recuse herself because Bevan failed to establish that the magistrate judge had any personal bias. … Thus, the officers were not enabling clearly unlawful actions.

Jorge Alberto De La Luz v. U.S. Attorney General

497 F. App'x 933 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 20, 2012

The Factual Stipulation clearly reveals that Petitioner used a counterfeit lawful permanent residence card by submitting it to U.S. … To qualify for withholding of removal under the INA, the applicant must His argument, as indicated in the following text, is that the BIA should not have considered the Factual Stipulation as evidence that he admitted the

Jean Neckson Cadet v. John M. Bulger

377 F.3d 1173 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 20, 2004

Cyr, however, did not establish the outer limits of habeas review. … Applying CAT in Cadet’s case, we conclude that the conditions of Haiti’s prisons qualify as “cruel, inhuman and degrading” under CAT.

William Johnson v. County of Paulding, Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 12, 2019

“It is now clearly established that prisoners have a constitutional right of access to the courts,” which requires prison authorities to assist inmates in the preparation and filing of meaningful legal papers by providing … To assert an access-to-the-courts claim, an inmate must first establish an actual injury. Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 348-49 (1996).

United States v. Andrew Francois Martin

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 5, 2026

It is well established that a court may vary from the Sentenc- ing Guidelines based on the § 3553(a) factors. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 49–50. … And the district court clearly was permitted to consider this conduct when weighing the § 3553(a) factors. See Wilson, 788 F.3d at 1317.

United States v. Tony Jerome Henry

307 F. App'x 331 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 13, 2009

While we have recognized a defendant’s presumptive right under the Sixth Amendment to counsel of his choice, we have held that this right is not absolute, but is qualified by the judiciary’s “independent interest in ensuring … to show the quantity of crack cocaine attributed to the conspiracy and that Dell was extensively involved in the conspiracy to distribute the entire quantity of crack cocaine, we hold that the district court did not clearly