Case law

Hussam Chahin v. U.S. Attorney General

190 F. App'x 921 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 2, 2006

Any alien, who, after written notice has been provided, does not attend a proceeding, shall be ordered removed in absentia if the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) establishes by “clear, unequivocal, and convincing … Incompetent representation by counsel can qualify as an “exceptional circumstance.” Saakian v. I.N.S., 252 F.3d 21, 25 (1st Cir. 2001).

D. Bruce McMahan v. William A. Toto

256 F.3d 1120 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 10, 2001

C.P.L.R. 7804(g), and the breach of contract claim was clearly raised in the pleadings, we think that claim actually was decided against MBM and McMahan in Bass. See Grubb v. … As the Florida Supreme Court has noted: Under this statute, the legislature did not give judges the discretion to determine whether it is reasonable to entitle qualifying plaintiffs to fees.

Lucia I. Medina Martinez v. US Attorney General

413 F. App'x 163 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 4, 2011

And, finally, the alien must “establish[] that removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to the alien’s spouse, parent, or child, who is a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted … However, as is described above, Soram clearly and unquestionably precludes this argument.

United States v. Alexis Perez

355 F. App'x 349 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 7, 2009

P. 28(i). 5 participant qualify for a three-level reduction. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. … Thus, the district court did not clearly err by denying Perez a minor-role reduction. AFFIRMED. 7

Deron King v. Butts County Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 13, 2014

The burden then shifts back to the plaintiff to establish pretext. Id. IV. DISCUSSION A. … However, King contends that the factual allegations in his complaint nonetheless clearly indicate his intent to bring those claims under § 1983.

United States v. Santonio Juvon Jackson

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 1, 2020

After establishing that Chesnet expected to receive between $4,000 and $18,000 in cocaine from Jackson, counsel continued: Q. All right. So we’re going to double down. … Did you have a well-established history of selling drugs on consignment for Mr. Jackson from March to September? A. Yes, sir. Q.

United States v. Robert Glenn Smithson, II

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 6, 2018

U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(A). 6  Case: 17-13165 Date Filed: 04/06/2018 Page: 7 of 9 qualified as ‘a licensed dealer or private seller of firearms or ammunition … We therefore conclude that the district court did not clearly err in finding that Smithson possessed a firearm in connection with another felony offense.

United States v. Javier Hernandez Rodriguez

262 F. App'x 154 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 10, 2008

We review the district court’s determination of whether a defendant qualifies for a mitigating-role reduction for clear error. United States v. Boyd, 291 F.3d 1274, 1277 (11th Cir. 2002). … The district court’s denial of Hernandez-Rodriguez’s request for a mitigating-role reduction was not clearly erroneous, as the court adequately considered Hernandez-Rodriguez’s role in the relevant conduct, as well as his

United States v. David Earl Allen

564 F. App'x 550 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 5, 2014

At trial, the government presented testimony and audio recordings establishing that Allen sold methamphetamine and marijuana to Greenwood, who was another informant for the county task force. … The district court did not clearly err when it enhanced Allen’s sentence for obstruction of justice.

United States v. Jose Maria Sanchez

159 F. App'x 139 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 15, 2005

Sanchez argues two issues on appeal, namely, that (1) the district court clearly erred in denying Sanchez a minimal or minor role reduction, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b); and (2) the district court’s imposition of a … Accordingly, the district court did not err in determining that Sanchez did not qualify for a minor role reduction. II.

Guillermo Ramirez v. E.I. DuPont Nemours & Company

579 F. App'x 878 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 11, 2014

The EPA had done this type of risk assessment for the farming chemicals at issue in this case and established maximum exposure levels. … Cohen clearly was qualified to testify as an expert as to whether the chemicals in Benlate caused Ramirez’s cancer and tumors. And Dr.

Darlene Smith v. Wynfield Dev. Co., Inc.

238 F. App'x 451 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 8, 2007

First, the group health plan at issue here is clearly an ERISA plan. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), (3); Morstein v. Nat’l Ins. … Servs., Inc., 93 F.3d 715, 718 n.5 (11th Cir. 1996) (en banc) (noting that “medical insurance policies” qualify as employee welfare benefit plans).

Bonita Perry v. Alabama Dept. of Corrections

130 F. App'x 399 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 5, 2005

Southwestern Airlines Co., 385 F.3d 1224, 1330 (11th Cir. 2004). 3 was not entitled to relief and raised defenses of immunity, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. … We have held that an employer need only produce a neutral reason, which the defendants clearly did, arguing as they have that they chose not to rehire Perry because her past work performance was sufficiently deficient

United States v. Michael Shaquille Lee

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 28, 2024

The district court did not clearly err in finding that Mr. Lee did not warrant a minor role reduction. As the district court made clear at sentencing, Mr. … Lee has failed to establish any error, much less plain error.

William W. Cole, Jr. v. Lori Patton

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

This method, the Eighth Circuit held, was not “clearly erroneous.” Id. … A fact judicially admitted is a fact “established not only beyond the need of evidence to prove [it], but beyond the power of evidence to controvert [it].” Cooper v.

Zehra Vellani v. U.S. Attorney General

296 F. App'x 870 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 20, 2008

To qualify for asylum, the alien must prove that she is a refugee. Al Najjar, 257 F.3d at 1284 (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A)). … Thus, the record does not establish that there actually was a translation problem.

United States v. Thomas M. Jackson, Jr.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 23, 2018

The district court’s finding was not clearly erroneous. … Jackson argues that this enhancement was erroneously applied because his conduct qualified for the base offense level of aggravated assault only as a result of the use of the car.

Rohan Mangroo v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 14, 2025

Mangroo argued that the IJ erred by (1) requiring him to file a Form I-601; (2) applying an improper legal standard—extreme hardship to a qualifying relative—to his § 237(a)(1)(H) waiver request; and … This argument is insufficient to raise clearly the alleged legal error Mangroo now raises in his petition for review.

Jane Doe 8 v. Chiquita Brands International, Inc.

48 F.4th 1202 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2022

But because judge-made rules -- like the one found in American Pipe -- do not qualify as Federal Rules of Civil Procedure under Hanna v. Plumer, this inquiry does not apply to them. See Carbone v. … 30 Opinion of the Court 21-10211 In Vaught, the Fifth Circuit applied a Texas rule proscribing class tolling, notwithstanding the federal interests at play: [T]his Texas rule clearly

Helal Mohammad v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 14, 2022

ASYLUM AND WITHHOLDING OF REMOVAL As to his asylum and withholding of removal claims, Mo- hammad asserts the IJ clearly erred in finding he was only partially credible. … The BIA and the IJ 2 To qualify for withholding of removal, an individual must show that, if re- turned to his country, his life or freedom would be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular