Case law

United States v. Rickey Thompson

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 20, 2022

Rather than responding, the government moves for summary affirmance, arguing that neither of Thompson’s reasons qualify as extraordinary and compelling, that the § 3553(a) factors do not weigh in favor of release, and that … Thompson thus does not establish an extraordinary and compelling reason warranting relief. As this is a necessary condition, we could grant the government’s motion on this ground alone. Tinker, 14 F.4th at 1237.

United States v. Bennie Wiley

703 F. App'x 950 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 16, 2017

established a per se rule, the rule only applied where the defendant established that his knife was four inches or less and in the folded position). … Here, the district court did not clearly err in determining that Wiley was a trespasser.

United States v. Tokars

95 F.3d 1520 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 6, 1996

This court reviews a trial court's determination of the quantity of drugs used to establish a base offense level for sentencing purposes under the clearly erroneous standard. … We conclude that the district court did not clearly err.

K. M. v. School Board of Lee County

150 F. App'x 953 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 7, 2005

The Mother testified that the Three Oaks principal told them that M.M. did not qualify for IDEA procedural safeguards because he did not have a disability; the principal testified she did not say this. … According to the director of the Board’s ESE program, this incident 2 Whether M.M.’s parents’ letters before 20 December clearly asked for a due process hearing under IDEA was disputed.

Seventh Street, LLC v. Baldwin County Planning & Zoning Commission

172 F. App'x 918 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 6, 2006

Act Number 98-655 provides that the County Commission cannot “exercise its planning and zoning powers and jurisdiction in any planning district established under this act until the majority of the qualified electors of … that sections 10.3.3(a)(1) and 10.3.3(a)(2) of the Subdivision Regulations were applied in violation of due process to deny its application because they “give the [] Commission unlimited discretion, and fail to provide clearly

Demetruis Delfon Carter v. Warden Marty Allen

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 6, 2019

Simmons, 879 F.3d at 1164 (“Though entitlement to qualified immunity presents a question of law, resolution of this question can sometimes turn on issues of fact.”). … N.L.R.B., 461 U.S. 731, 743 (1983) (“[F]alse statements are not immunized by the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.”).

United States v. Jonathan Anthony Reid

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 19, 2025

An er- ror is plain if the legal rule is “clearly established at the time the case is reviewed on direct appeal.” United States v. … And just like in Laines, Reid has identified no precedent that clearly establishes that the Florida definition of either cocaine or heroin is overbroad.

Village of Indian Creek, Florida v. FAA

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 2, 2022

Under the Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) must establish NAAQS for certain pollutants. Id. … However, the FAA need not perform a con- formity analysis on certain exempt actions that result in no emis- sions increases or increases that are clearly de minimis.

Cable Holdings of Georgia, Inc. v. McNeil Real Estate Fund VI, Ltd.

988 F.2d 1071 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 23, 1993

The panel, by proceeding as if the clause is not self-executing, has established a rule with far-reaching implications. … First, the panel was bound by Supreme Court precedent that clearly establishes that statutes are not unconstitutional because they do not explicitly provide for just compensation; yet the panel, misunderstanding dictates

Profitel Group, LLC v. Polyone Corporation

238 F. App'x 444 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 7, 2007

We find no additional requirement that the validity of the asserted error be upheld as a legally-recoverable claim in a court of law before it qualifies as a billing error. … With this universe of evidence, summary judgment is clearly inappropriate for either party.

OFS FITEL, LLC v. Epstein, Becker and Green, PC

549 F.3d 1344 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 28, 2008

Fitel’s response objected on privilege, work product immunity, and relevance grounds but, subject to those objections, agreed to “produce documents responsive to [the Document Request] that reflect the amounts of attorneys … Fitel argues the undisputed facts in the record do not support the willfulness/stonewalling finding, but establish only substantial justification. We agree and explain why.

Wyke v. Polk County School Board

137 F.3d 1292 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 26, 1998

An "insubstantial" federal question is one that is either "obviously without merit," or one that is clearly foreclosed by previous Supreme Court decisions. … That duty is operational, not discretionary, and the school is not entitled to sovereign immunity. Doe, 599 So.2d at 227; Comuntzis v. Pinellas County Sch. Bd., 508 So.2d 750, 753 (Fla. 2nd Dist.Ct.App.1987).

First Baptist Church of Lillian v. Church Mutual Insurance Company

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 10, 2024

The voluminous evidence presented at trial by the opposing engineering experts, Michael Biller and Kurt Mulder, clearly presented issues of fact for the jury to decide, and the testimony offered by … It is undisputed that the burden of proof was on First Baptist to establish coverage under the policy for damages claimed.

Marie Therese Halim v. United States Atty. General, Immigration and Naturalization Service

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 5, 2003

The reference to readmission, however, is immediately qualified by the phrase, "provided his or her departure was authorized under the Service's advance parole provisions contained in § 212.5(f) . . . ." … We clearly have no authority to decide whether an applicant, ordered excluded by this Board due to lack of proper documents, may still demonstrate eligibility for temporary resident status . . .

William Neal Moore v. Charles Balkcom, Warden, Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General

716 F.2d 1511 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 30, 1983

so clearly undeserving of capital punishment that to impose it would be patently unjust and would shock the conscience.” … Moore seeks to establish that the Georgia Supreme Court “failed properly to perform its task in this case” of reviewing “similar cases.” See Gregg v.

United States v. Anthony Washington

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 22, 2024

Bruen emphasized that Heller established the correct test for determining the constitutionality of gun re- strictions. See id. at 39. … We held that the challenge was foreclosed by Rozier, which “inter- preted Heller as limiting the [Second Amendment] right to law- abiding and qualified individuals and as clearly excluding felons

Larry Coleman v. Morris-Shea Bridge Company, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 20, 2026

First, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination by demonstrating that: “(1) he belongs to a protected class; (2) he suffered an adverse employment action; (3) he was qualified … comparators outside the protected class received higher compensation; and (4) [he] was qualified to receive the higher wage.”

Village of Indian Creek, Florida v. FAA

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 2, 2022

Under the Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) must establish NAAQS for certain pollutants. Id. … However, the FAA need not perform a con- formity analysis on certain exempt actions that result in no emis- sions increases or increases that are clearly de minimis.

Holsomback v. White

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 26, 1998

Because Holsomback clearly addressed this deficiency in recounting the procedural history of the case, (see R.1-1 at 60-61), however, we interpret his petition to include this allegation. See Golden v. … Nolan was qualified as an expert in family medicine and all the areas it encompasses. (See R.1-7, Ex. F at 17). Dr.

United States v. Michael A. Horne

198 F. App'x 865 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 18, 2006

Horne did not qualify for the 15 exception described in Greer because the indictment did not allege an incorrect venue. … Horne argues that the district court clearly erred at sentencing by finding that he had not accepted responsibility for his offenses.