Case law

Sherri Williams v. Bill Pryor

240 F.3d 944 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 31, 2001

Restrictions on the distribution of contraceptives clearly burden the freedom to make such decisions.... … See 648 F.2d at 1027-28. 2010, as well as a woman's qualified right to terminate a pregnancy, see, e.g., Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 112 S.Ct. 2791, 120 L.Ed.2d 674 (1992); Roe v.

Sherri Williams v. Bill Pryor

240 F.3d 944 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 31, 2001

Restrictions on the distribution of contraceptives clearly burden the freedom to make such decisions.... … at 479, 85 S.Ct. at 1678; Eisenstadt, 405 U.S. at 438, 92 S.Ct. at 1029; Carey, 431 U.S. at 678, 97 S.Ct. at 2010, as well as a woman's qualified right to terminate a pregnancy, see, e.g., Planned Parenthood v.

Martin Forsyth v. University of Alabama, Board of Trustees

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2021

[by] showing that (1) [he] had a disability; (2) [he] was otherwise qualified for the position; and (3) [he] was subjected to unlawful discrimination as the result of [his] disability.” Garrett v. … The employer “must clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence,” Burdine, 450 U.S. at 255, a reason unrelated to disability “that might motivate a reasonable employer” to fire an employee, Chapman

United States v. Bernando Davis

586 F. App'x 534 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 2, 2014

established those facts. … As the record shows, there were thousands of victims whose personal identifying information was compromised as part of the scheme in which Davis participated, and they clearly qualified as “victims” under the plain language

United States v. Juan Carlos Ruiz-Rodriguez

277 F.3d 1281 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 2, 2002

The majority further emphasized that “[t]he Act evinces a congressional belief that magistrates are well qualified to handle matters of similar importance to jury selection but conditions their authority to accept such … We do not insist that the defendant must be personally addressed by the court, but the record must be such as to clearly show that the defendant has consented personally to the procedure. 174 F.3d at

Estate of Arlene Townsend v. Steven Berman

81 F.4th 1264 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 18, 2023

(4) The claim of successor liability is established. … Wilkes also contended that the Bankruptcy Court’s denial of its request to reopen discovery for the purpose of establishing a to the Probate Estates themselves.

Waseem Daker v. Sheriff, Cobb County

660 F. App'x 737 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 22, 2016

Prince’s affidavit does not state (much less conclusively establish) that CCADC’s policy complied with the due process requirements set forth in Perry. … Elrod, 881 F.2d 441, 444–46 (7th Cir. 1989), which denied qualified immunity to prison officials who had been sued by a pretrial detainee after they implemented a total ban on hardcover books, including those sent directly

United States v. Carlos Tejeda

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2026

This clearly shows his intent to participate in the scheme. Further, police found point-of-sale terminals at Pelaez’s home as well as receipts from the fraudulent transactions. … To establish aggravated identity theft under 18 U.S.C.

Positano Place at Naples II Condominium Association, Inc. v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 31, 2023

Section 1292(a) creates a narrow exception from the “long- established policy against piecemeal appeals.” Gardner v. Westing- house Broad. Co., 437 U.S. 478, 480 (1978). … What it says, therefore, is that although the interlocutory order compels Empire to act (and is en- forceable by the contempt power), the order is unappealable under § 1292(a)(1) because to qualify

Hunt v. Hawthorn Associates, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 5, 1997

. § 1102(a)(1) (“Every employee benefit plan shall be established and maintained pursuant to a written instrument.”). … of liability to make sense, the TAC would necessarily have acted as de facto Plan administrator in Eastern's stead; as discussed above, this theory is inconsistent 55 with the Plan and clearly

Jose M. Ruvira Guerra v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 22, 2025

It explained that it would review questions of fact under the clearly erroneous standard, 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(i), and all other issues de novo, id. … “An act that results in unanticipated or unintended severity of pain and suffering” does not qualify as torture. Id.

Kym Holley v. Georgia Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 12, 2021

Assuming that Staub established agency principles that constituted a lower burden for plaintiffs in establishing cat’s paw, Holley still cannot satisfy its standard. See Staub, 562 U.S. at 422. … While the DOC’s refusal to allow Holley to dispute his GCIC report clearly violated its own policy, it doesn’t provide evidence that the DOC’s proffered reason for rescinding the offer was pretextual.

United States v. Larry Bernard Gilmore

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 2, 2020

“A district court abuses its discretion when it misapplies the law in reaching its decision or bases its decision on findings of fact that are clearly erroneous.” Id. … Thus, unless an offense is a crime of violence under the elements clause, or is a drug trafficking crime, it does not qualify as a § 924(c) predicate offense.

United States v. Mahmoud Aldissi

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 13, 2018

Summary of Relevant Facts Congress established the SBIR and STTR programs to assist qualified small businesses with the expense of researching and developing innovative technology “in order to maintain and strengthen … The district court clearly and cogently explained its basis for the sentences imposed and referenced the sentencing factors.

United States v. Gilberto Ojeda

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 9, 2019

The defendant bears the burden of establishing his minor role in the offense by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. … De Varon, 175 F.3d at 941–43 (noting, for example, that unless there are additional facts as to the defendant’s status and assigned tasks within the scheme, a drug courier’s own act of importation alone will not qualify

Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Company, Inc. v. C.N. Lloyd Brasileiro, the Hartford Insurance Company of Alabama, in Personam

874 F.2d 1551 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 13, 1989

The district court found that for the Hartford to prevail, it must demonstrate clearly and unambiguously that no coverage was intended. Id. … A nexus is established when the wrong occurs in navigable waters and bears a “substantial relationship to traditional maritime activity.” Executive Jet Aviation, 409 U.S. at 268 , 93 S.Ct. at 504 .

Rafael Fernandez Garcia v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 19, 2020

His indictment alleged multiple predicate offenses for the § 924(o) charge, and Davis establishes that one of those offenses is not a crime of violence. … “Where, as here, the evidence does not clearly explain what happened . . . the party with the burden loses.” Beeman, 871 F.3d at 1225 (quoting Romine v. Head, 253 F.3d 1349, 1357 (11th Cir. 2001)).

United States v. Ayodele Abolarinwa

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

First, “the district court must determine whether the party challenging the peremptory strikes has established a prima facie case of discrimination by establishing facts sufficient to support an inference … Abolarinwa has not shown that the district court’s decision was clearly erroneous.

Thomas D. Arthur v. Kim Tobias Thomas

739 F.3d 611 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 6, 2014

As to actual innocence, the district court found that Arthur had not made a showing of “actual innocence” sufficient to establish a “miscarriage of justice” and avoid AEDPA’s time bar. … The Coleman Court held that negligence on the part of a prisoner’s post-conviction attorney did not qualify as “cause” sufficient to excuse the procedural default of the habeas claims. Id. at 753, 111 S.

United States v. Richard Daniel

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 31, 2023

where time is of the essence, such as “situations where important public policy is- sues are involved or those where rights delayed are rights denied,” or where “the position of one of the parties is clearly … consider any information relevant to understanding a defendant’s individual circumstances, and “[n]othing in the text and structure of the First Step Act expressly, or even implicitly, over- comes the established