Case law

Geoffrey Scimone v. Carnival Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 1, 2013

Third, the burden of establishing removal jurisdiction rests with the defendant seeking removal. … The Seventh Circuit therefore interpreted the “[t]he mass action provision [to] give[] plaintiffs the choice to file separate actions that do not qualify for CAFA jurisdiction.” Id.

United States v. Joshua Anthony Rivera

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

Second, our precedent establishes that Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence for purposes of § 924(c). … To the extent review is available here, Rivera must establish a plain error, see United States v.

United States v. Michael A. Rosin

263 F. App'x 16 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 16, 2008

On appeal, Rosin argues the prosecutor committed misconduct by arguing Flowers was a treating physician who could testify as a fact witness, rather than as the expert witness he clearly was. … And similarly, evidence which establishes only that a person made a mistake in judgment or 31  an error in management or was careless does not establish fraudulent

Dawn Plagianes v. Fulton County School District

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 1, 2026

FCSD’s notice of termi- nation was unequivocal because it clearly communicated to Plagi- anes that she was losing her job in any circumstance and thus started the 180-day time period to file the EEOC … Without a qualifier, such as that FCSD was searching for an- other position for Plagianes or that Plagianes could apply for a transfer, FCSD’s April 2021 statement could not reasonably have led Plagianes

American Iron & Steel Institute v. Occupational Safety & Health Administration

182 F.3d 1261 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 3, 1999

Under these circumstances, interested parties were adequately put on notice that the Standard might establish an expanded role for non-physician health care professionals and, concomitantly, a diminished mandatory role … The void-for-vagueness doctrine typically applies where a statute prohibits conduct without clearly defining that conduct. City of Mesquite v.

United States v. Timothy Tijwan Doctor

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 28, 2020

Thus, Doctor argues, joinder of his 2006 crimes in the same charging document established that “the offenses were part of the same criminal episode.” … They held that a district court may not use Shepard documents in determining whether a prior conviction qualifies as a violent felony where that conviction was for violating an indivisible statute with a single set of

Lewis v. U.S. Department of Labor, Administrative Review Board

368 F. App'x 20 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 24, 2010

Because Walker was technically qualified to review the article, neither Smith nor Walker believed that Walker’s inclusion on the panel was problematic or created a conflict of interest. … Boston University. 12 Although the ALJ assumed applicability of all six environmental whistleblower statutes under which Lewis filed his complaint, the ARB noted that Congress waived federal sovereign immunity

Dr. Bozorgmehr Pouyeh v. Public Health Trust of Jackson Health System

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 22, 2020

Nor can we say that dismissal clearly was warranted on shotgun-pleading grounds. … Pouyeh covered his objective qualifications in substantial detail, and we think his factual allegations are enough to plausibly establish that he applied to and was qualified for these programs, apart from the requirements

United States v. Eugene Telfair

473 F. App'x 867 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 10, 2012

Accordingly, the evidence was sufficient to establish that Telfair knowingly and willfully stole money entrusted to FAMU FCU. … the MLP, including determining who qualified for the micro-loans and actually disbursing FAMU’s grant funds.

United States v. Maurice Mitchell

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 11, 2018

The following facts were established at trial. An officer with the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office was on patrol when he noticed a gold minivan driving suspiciously. … The gun’s mere presence in the van, Mitchell contended, was insufficient to establish that he possessed it “in connection with” the felony.

Romero Castillo v. U.S. Attorney General

423 F. App'x 967 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 20, 2011

On appeal, Romero argues that the record does not clearly show that she or Lopez-Rubiano either admitted to the factual allegations contained in the Notices to Appear or conceded their removability, as the IJ found. … An alien may qualify for asylum by presenting credible evidence showing either (1) past persecution on account of her political opinion or any other protected ground, or (2) a well-founded fear that her political opinion

Anthony Joseph Farina v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

536 F. App'x 966 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 30, 2013

Direct Appeal & Resentencing On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court vacated the death sentences of both Farina brothers because a qualified prospective juror had been erroneously excused for cause during their … He also asserts that the Florida Supreme Court, in denying this claim, unreasonably applied clearly established federal law and made unreasonable determinations of the facts.

William Layton Roberts v. Randstad North America

231 F. App'x 890 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 16, 2007

Whatley clearly told Harding-Baker that she had not assisted Roberts and stated that it was well-known in the office that Roberts had personally performed the validations. … action; (3) he was qualified for the position held; and (4) he was replaced by a person outside of the protected class.

United States v. Alejandro Estrada Aplesa

690 F. App'x 630 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 23, 2017

He challenges his sentence on the ground that the court clearly erred in determining that he did not qualify for a minor-role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. … Moreover, the parts of Rosemond on which Aplesa relies are wholly consistent with the well-established law of this Circuit.

Denise Abeid-Saba v. Carnival Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 1, 2013

Third, the burden of establishing removal jurisdiction rests with the defendant seeking removal. … The Seventh Circuit therefore interpreted the “[t]he mass action provision [to] give[] plaintiffs the choice to file separate actions that do not qualify for CAFA jurisdiction.” Id.

MCA Television v. Public Interest

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 6, 1999

As the Harms standard clearly states, however, an action “arises under” the Copyright Act where the complaint “is for a remedy expressly granted by the Act, e.g., a suit for infringement.” Harms, 339 F.2d at 828. … If it were possible for a defendant to violate an antitrust law, and yet produce no injury, he would be immune from private damage actions.”).

United States v. Cordell Felix

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 8, 2017

Because neither Mathis nor Descamps are “clearly on point,” they do not overrule or undermine our prior precedent to the point of abrogation. See United States v. … qualify as violent felonies under the ACCA.”).

Andrzej Madura v. Bank of America, NA

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 10, 2014

App. 2004) (recognizing a “promissory note is clearly a negotiable instrument” under Florida law). 22  Case: 13-13953 Date Filed: 11/10/2014 Page: 23 of 35 … BOA has established its standing to foreclose on the Maduras’ mortgage.

American Marine Tech, Inc. v. World Group Yachting, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 14, 2021

United States, 681 F.2d 91, 93 (1st Cir. 1982) (“[A] qualifying ‘vessel’ is one that is capable of use as a vessel even if not functioning as such at the moment in question.”); Her- cules Co., Inc. v. The Brigadier Gen. … At trial, AMT established through witness testimony and past versions of the estimate contract that, initially, it had provided WGY a cost estimate of $115,000 to replace the Alchemist’s en- gines.

Castillo, etc. v. US Atty. General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 20, 2011

On appeal, Romero-Castillo argues that the record does not clearly show that she or Lopez-Rubiano either admitted to the factual allegations contained in the Notices to Appear or conceded their removability, as the IJ found … An alien may qualify for asylum by presenting credible evidence showing either (1) past persecution on account of her political opinion or any other protected ground, or (2) a well-founded fear that her political opinion