Case law

United States v. Gernaldo Alfonso Feliz

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 1, 2022

Moreover, the government agreed that Feliz qualified for the safety valve provision. The government, how- ever, did argue that Feliz did not qualify for the minor role reduc- tion. … Second, the District Court did not clearly err in finding that Feliz was not entitled to a minor role reduction.

Gabner Fils St. Germain v. US Attorney General

371 F. App'x 34 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 29, 2010

The asylum applicant bears the burden of proving that he qualifies as a “refugee.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(a). … “The asylum applicant must establish eligibility for asylum by offering credible, direct, and specific evidence in the record.” Forgue, 401 F.3d at 1287 (quotation omitted).

Jennings v. BIC Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 22, 1999

The complaint also stated a cause of action in 1 "If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as … Clearly, the "Keep out of reach of children" warning on lighter packaging is there in order to put the adult purchaser, the intended user, on notice that the lighters pose a danger to children.

Jay Palmer v. Brg of Georgia, Inc., a Georgia Corporation, D/B/A Bar/bri

874 F.2d 1417 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 29, 1990

The record reflects that the plaintiffs’ counsel was qualified and experienced, and prepared this case from its inception in a competent and professional manner. … Thus, the only market ever claimed by both Defendants is the state of Georgia, and clearly the state of Georgia was not divided up under either the 1980 or 1982 agreements.

Wilbur Veasy v. Sheriff of Palm Beach County

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 14, 2018

Absent direct evidence of discrimination, courts apply the burden-shifting framework established in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802– 04, 93 S. … “Under that framework, the plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination, typically by showing that she was a qualified member of a protected class” and that she was “subjected to an adverse employment

United States v. Dennis Gray Williams

790 F.3d 1240 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 22, 2015

However, “it is well-established . . . that a disjunctive statute may be pleaded conjunctively and proved disjunctively.” See United States v. Haymes, 610 F.2d 309, 310 (5th Cir. 1980) (citing United States v. … Reynolds Secs., Inc., 667 F.2d 33, 34 (11th Cir. 1982)). 4 Furthermore, the one check (Count Four) bearing both the Gelmans’ name and their account/routing number was “clearly fake,” according the district court judge who

Burlington Insurance Company, Inc. v. Iledieu Cireus

560 F. App'x 844 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 19, 2014

Burlington then brought the instant action for declaratory relief to establish that it was not responsible for defending or indemnifying either Normandy or Webster on the grounds that coverage was barred by the assault, … In this case, the Appellants allege that their complaints in the state court actions clearly included allegations that trigger coverage under the Policy, including that Normandy was negligent for hiring and retaining Webster

Daniel Eric Cobble v. U.S. Government

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 29, 2020

As to his habeas cases, Cobble asserts that the district court’s justification for dismissal addressed only his “one claim” for diplomatic immunity, deportation, enforcement of his marriage, termination of pending state … “[T]he clerk shall receive the papers that [Cobble] submits, open a miscellaneous case number, and forward the documents to the presiding District Judge to determine whether [Cobble] qualifies as indigent and whether he

Dina R. Gomez De Sandoval v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 31, 2018

The BIA also found unpersuasive her claim of persecution based on an imputed anti-gang political opinion, stating that the IJ’s finding that the gang’s motives were criminal in nature was not clearly … Her refusal to pay extortion money alone is not enough to establish persecution on account of a protected ground.

Soho Ocean Resort TRS, LLC v. Daniel Rutois

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 18, 2023

Specifically, they argued that Soho failed to allege the prima facie elements of tortious interference as to Count I, that it failed to allege damages as to Count II, that Ru- tois enjoyed a qualified … Nevertheless, a complaint may be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) when its own allegations indicate the existence of an affirmative defense, so long as the defense clearly appears on the face of the complaint

Landsman Packing Co. v. Continental Can Co.

864 F.2d 721 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 30, 1989

At trial Continental established that Landsman had possession of the machine, that Continental had demanded its return, and that Landsman refused to return the machine. … See McEntee, 45 N.Y. at 37 (noting that qualified refusal must be reasonable and in good faith); Holbrook, 24 Wend. at 176 (stating that refusal must be in good faith and based on reasonable excuse).

Jaspal Singh v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 7, 2022

Singh’s appeal concluding that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was not clearly erroneous and was based on specific, cogent reasons, including inconsistencies in Mr. … “[I]f an ap- plicant is unable to meet the well-founded fear standard for asy- lum, he is generally precluded from qualifying for…withholding of deportation.” Mazariegos v. U.S.

Joel D. Joseph v. Richard S. Bernstein

612 F. App'x 551 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 12, 2015

If an appellant fails to clearly identify and challenge in his initial brief one of the grounds on which the district court based its judgment, he is deemed to have abandoned any challenge to that ground, and we will affirm … Establishing a “pattern of racketeering activity” requires at least two predicate acts of racketeering activity. See Williams v. Mohawk Indus. Inc., 465 F.3d 1277, 1283 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam).

United States v. Jarnel Sael

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 6, 2025

To establish plain error, the party must show (1) there is “error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that has af- fected [his] substantial rights.” United States v. … It, thus, clearly weighed the strength of the Government’s case when it made the decision.

United States v. Nadege Auguste

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 30, 2025

Indeed, the Court highlighted the lack of authority “establish[ing] ‘potentially valuable economic information’ as a traditionally recognized property interest.” Id. … And the parties’ trial stipulations established that Auguste’s co- conspirators were prepared to testify that “it was clearly understood and foreseeable to all the charged conspirators that the

Mama Jo's Inc. v. Sparta Insurance Company

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 18, 2020

“‘A district court abuses its discretion if it applies an incorrect legal standard, follows improper procedures in making the determination, or makes findings of fact that are clearly erroneous.’” United States v. … Berries did not establish that Thompson’s opinions are reliable.

United States v. Vicente Espino Garcia

563 F. App'x 714 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 18, 2014

In addition, the direct and circumstantial evidence at trial sufficiently establishes Garcia’s knowledge and intent. … His convictions properly qualify for the mandatory minimum sentence. III.

Richard Ferrell v. Harold E. Wolfe, Jr.

311 F. App'x 253 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 9, 2009

Circuit held that it was “virtually impossible” for the plaintiffs to establish closed-ended continuity. Id. at 1265. … Appellants were required to clearly connect each factual allegation to the appropriate count in the complaint in order to satisfy Rule 9(b). See Wagner v. First Horizon Pharm.

United States v. David Yeg Hom

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 15, 2013

A written Miranda waiver “is usually strong proof of the validity of that waiver, but is not inevitably either necessary or sufficient to establish waiver.” United States v. … Simple assault does not qualify as a felony under Florida law, so the conduct must rise to the level of an aggravated assault in order to qualify as a felony. Fla. Stat. § 784.011(2).

Tommie Kemp, Jr. v. Michael J. Astrue

308 F. App'x 423 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 26, 2009

The ALJ gave specific reasons for why the VA’s 30% disability rating based on PTSD did not 7 qualify the condition as a severe impairment under the SSA guidelines. … A reviewing court should not disturb a clearly articulated credibility finding with substantial supporting evidence in the record. Foote, 67 F.3d at 1561-62.