Case law

John Doe v. Samford University

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 24, 2022

Doe advances two tests for establishing liability for a univer- sity disciplinary proceeding, both derived from Yusufv. … Chavel stated that he wanted to “energize” the underwriting department -- clearly implying that plaintiff was too old for the job. 24. In light of Mr. Papadopoulo’s inexperience, Mr.

Aniel Noel v. U.S. Attorney General

228 F. App'x 916 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 25, 2007

The BIA also stated that it was unpersuaded that the IJ’s findings of fact were clearly erroneous. Noel filed this petition for review. II. … Alternatively, an alien may qualify for political opinion asylum if he shows that he was persecuted because of an opinion that the persecutor attributed to him. Al Najjar v.

United States v. John F. Thompson, III

133 F. App'x 652 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 27, 2005

. § 3C1.1, a remand is unnecessary “if the record clearly reflects the basis for enhancement.” Id. … But Thompson asked Wheelous only about Mead’s violated these contracts by selling loads of timber from mixed tracts of land. 3 We need not address the government’s argument that Wheelous was not qualified as an expert

Jorge Luis Pinto Pacheco v. U.S. Atty. Gen.

305 F. App'x 589 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 30, 2008

To establish eligibility, the alien must, with specific and credible evidence, establish (1) past persecution on account of a statutorily listed factor, or (2) a well-founded fear that the statutorily listed factor will … Finally, to qualify for withholding of removal, an alien must establish standards more stringent that those for asylum eligibility.

United States v. Francel Rodriguez

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

And here the record reflects that the Rodriguez exercised sufficient authority to qualify as a manager or supervisor. … After reviewing the record, we are left with no definite and firm conviction that the district court clearly erred in applying the enhancement.

United States v. Joseph Peter Clarke

649 F. App'x 837 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 11, 2016

Whether a conviction qualifies under § 922(g)(1) is “determined in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction in which the proceedings were held.” 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20). … An error is plain only if precedent of this Court or the Supreme Court or the unequivocal language of a statute establishes that the decision was erroneous. United States v.

Miranda L. Day v. Persels & Associates, LLC

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 10, 2013

Litig., 350 F.3d 360, 363 n.3 (3d Cir. 2003) (“Objectors . . . do not qualify as a party for purposes of appealing [an] original settlement,” when they “neither objected at the fairness hearing nor appealed the settlement … But this declaration establishes only that one of seven defendants would be unable to satisfy a significant judgment.

United States v. Dwight Gibson

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 8, 2018

Gibson argues that proximity alone cannot establish that he used a firearm in connection with the drug sale under § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). … Gibson was charged with drug distribution, which qualifies as a “drug trafficking offense” and triggers the application of Application Note 14(B)’s close proximity standard.

United States v. Asieba Imadjam Thomas

488 F. App'x 440 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 30, 2012

unreasonable if the district court improperly calculates the Guidelines range, treats the Guidelines as mandatory rather than advisory, fails to consider the appropriate statutory factors, selects a sentence based on clearly … Where a party fails to object in the district court, we review the issue for plain error, which requires a defendant to establish “(1) that there was error (2) that was plain; (3) that affected his substantial rights;

Jane Doe II v. Savannah-Chatham County Public School System

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

To state a claim for relief under section 1983, a plaintiff must allege facts showing (1) that an act or omission deprived him of “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States … On this record, we cannot conclude that the District’s re- sponse was “clearly unreasonable” under the known circum- stances.

United States v. Willie B. Johnson

305 F. App'x 524 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 15, 2008

A defendant is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a motion for a new trial if “the acumen gained by a trial judge over the course of the proceedings [made him] well qualified to rule on the [evidence] without a hearing … Even taking only these three witnesses, the amount of over five kilograms of cocaine is established.

Drew Adams v. School Board of St. Johns County, Florida

57 F.4th 791 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 30, 2022

Metro Dade County, 122 F.3d 895, 929 (11th Cir. 1997) (“[U]nder interme- diate scrutiny, a gender-conscious program need not closely tie its numerical goals to the proportion of qualified women … They establish that if a high-school transgender student identical to Drew had registered in the St.

Cesar David Nanez Dominguez v. U.S. Atty. Gen.

334 F. App'x 989 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 29, 2009

An alien may qualify for asylum by presenting credible evidence showing “(1) past persecution on account of her political opinion or any other protected ground, or (2) a ‘well-founded fear’ that her political opinion or … Failure to establish a claim of asylum necessarily causes a claim for withholding of removal to fail. Forgue, 401 F.3d at 1288 n.4.

Lazara Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security

625 F. App'x 408 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 27, 2015

Anderson, opined on Lewis’s functional capacity and stated, though Lewis had improved somewhat after quintuple bypass surgery, in view of his “‘documented cardiac problems . . . he should qualify for disability and be … We will not disturb “[a] clearly articulated credibility finding with substantial supporting evidence in the record.” Id.

United States v. Julio Antonio Diaz

194 F. App'x 842 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2006

Safety-valve On appeal, Diaz asserts that he truthfully provided information concerning his offense conduct during his debriefing with the DEA, and therefore, contends that he qualified for the safety-valve reduction … “[T]he party who challenges the sentence bears the burden of establishing that the sentence is unreasonable in the light of both [the] record and the factors in section 3553(a).”

KMS Restaurant Corp. v. Wendy's International, Inc.

194 F. App'x 591 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 9, 2006

An award of lost profits requires the establishment of some standard, such as regular market values or other established data by which reference to the amount of lost profits may be satisfactorily ascertained … Wendy’s contends that a new trial is warranted because the district court failed to instruct the jury that Wendy’s liability must be predicated on finding that “but for” Wendy’s improper acts, KMS would have been qualified

Roscoe George Campbell v. U.S. Attorney General

249 F. App'x 739 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 20, 2007

Although the INA does not expressly define “persecution” for purposes of qualifying as a “refugee,” see INA § 101(a)(42), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42), we have stated that “persecution is an extreme concept, requiring more than … In this case, contrary to Campbell’s assertion, the record demonstrates that the BIA, like the IJ, clearly made specific findings of fact regarding the adverse credibility determination.

United States v. Peter Tarantino

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 21, 2024

His CAM business partner, Mark Braddock, testified at trial with immunity, explaining how the bank-fraud scheme worked. … question is not whether we would reach the same decision utilizing these well-es- tablished principles and considering the evidence anew,” but rather “the question is whether the district court clearly

United States v. James L. Conner, E. Wyllys Taylor, W. Burns Hayter, B. Homer Darby, Sr., United States of America v. E. Wyllys Taylor, James L. Conner

752 F.2d 566 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 4, 1985

Mazurie, 419 U.S. 544, 550 , 95 S.Ct. 710, 714 , 42 L.Ed.2d 706 (1975), we find the following: "It is well established that vagueness challenges to statutes which do not involve First Amendment freedoms must be examined in … If those kickbacks qualify as an "interest" as used in 1963(a)(1) then they are forfeitable. Section 1963(a)(1) was interpreted by the Supreme Court in the case of Russello v.

Democratic Executive Committee of Florida v. Laurel M. Lee

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 15, 2019

Clearly, the cure issue was before the district court, and Defendants had an opportunity to be heard on it. C. … The District Court had no difficulty concluding that Plaintiffs had established the third factor as well.