Case law

Schneider

District Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 22, 2022

Qualifying claims are "those arising from any embezzlement, loss, or destruction of any property, goods, or merchandise shipped or put on board the vessel, any loss, damage, or injury by … "The damage claimants bear the initial burden of establishing liability (i.e., negligence or unseaworthiness), and the shipowner then bears the burden of establishing the lack of privity or knowledge

Higginbotham v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 7, 2023

Thus, an evidentiary hearing will not be conducted. 2 decision to qualify as an adjudication on the merits. See Harrington v. … Thus, upon review of the record, the Court concludes that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly

Lai v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 5, 2023

Thus, upon review of the record, the Court concludes that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established … Thus, upon review of the record, the Court concludes that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly

Goodson v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 28, 2024

of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings. … application of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings.

Abdallah v. Secretary, Department of Corrections (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 18, 2025

The state court need not issue an opinion explaining its rationale for the state court’s decision to qualify as an adjudication on the merits. See Harrington v. … When “[t]he [state court] [has] ‘clearly and expressly’ stated that its judgment rested on a procedural bar, and the bar provides an adequate and independent state ground for denying relief,” federal habeas relief is

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Liebowitz

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 11, 2022

This element is often established by circumstantial evidence. Glob. Quest, LLC v. … This element is clearly established, since the uncontradicted evidence is that MetLife would not have issued the Policy if Dr.

Gancedo v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 10, 2019

After a review of the record and the applicable law, the Court concludes that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application … of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings.

Flowers v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 13, 2021

The Court thus finds that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, and was not based … In applying such deference, the Court finds that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to clearly established federal law, did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established federal

Zaragoza v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 14, 2022

Capone completed a different form on October 5, 2017, for Plaintiff to qualify for subsidized childcare. (Tr. 445). In this form, Dr. … Pendleton finds that Plaintiff’s “mental illness alone clearly shows that he is incapable of work.

Walker v. Secretary, DOC (Lee County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 26, 2022

In this context, clearly established federal law consists of the governing legal principles, and not the dicta, set forth in the decisions of the United States Supreme Court at the time the state … A decision is contrary to clearly established federal law if the state court either: (1) applied a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth by Supreme Court precedent; or (2) reached a

Eldeeb v. Chertoff

619 F. Supp. 2d 1190 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 30, 2007

Establishing this would establish an element of the applicant’s claim under APA, for example. Hence, in these situations, determination of subject matter jurisdiction is intertwined with the merits of the case. … As a qualified applicant, he has a right to have CIS act on his application because CIS has a non-discretionary duty to him to act on his application. CIS has acted on his application.

Montgomery v. United States

557 F. Supp. 2d 1337 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 14, 2008

The Eleventh Circuit has also refrained from clearly defining the boundaries of Cuyler’s application to attorney conflict of interest cases. See, e.g., Schwab v. … As for Veronica Woulard’s testimony, Williams reminded the jury that Woulard was an admitted perjurer, that she was receiving immunity on the drug charges, and that she was even getting favorable consideration from the Government

Harvey v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 13, 2022

If the claim was “adjudicated on the merits” in state court, § 2254(d) bars relitigation of the claim unless the state court’s decision (1) “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established … of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings.

Clark-Hilery v. Marketopia LLC

District Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 14, 2025

Laws, a sales employee who was not a part of Marketopia’s executive team, may not qualify as a true comparator under the McDonnell Douglas framework, Mr. … Sauborin’s testimony does establish an inference of systematic treatment.

Southern v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 16, 2025

The state court need not issue an opinion explaining its rationale for the state court’s decision to qualify as an adjudication on the merits. Harrington v. … Stat. § 958.04(1) (“The court may sentence as a youthful offender any person [who qualifies under the statute].” (emphasis added)). See also Fine v.

PainTEQ, LLC v. Omnia Medical, LLC

District Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 21, 2024

“In order to establish the amount of profits to be disgorged, a plaintiff must establish the infringer’s gross sales of the product; it is then up to the defendant to refute that amount … While Omnia is correct that its unfair competition claims did include this qualifier, Omnia does not point to any evidence in the record of these other false representations.

Hamill v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 23, 2019

“The ALJ is required to consider the opinions of non-examining state agency medical and psychological consultants because they ‘are highly qualified physicians and psychologists, who are also experts in Social Security … When a claimant seeks to establish disability through her own testimony of pain or other subjective symptoms, the Eleventh Circuit’s three-part “pain standard” applies. Holt v.

Revels v. Morgan and Associates, P.C.

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 30, 2025

The Court need not address the parties’ arguments regarding section 1692d because Defendants’ conduct clearly violated section 1692e. … Defendants’ separate garnishment efforts are at issue, which were clearly initiated in a court that lacked jurisdiction over TBPA.

Scott v. Inch, (Duval County)

District Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 26, 2022

of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings. … of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceedings.

Rivera v. United States

District Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 16, 2024

Hubert and In re Fleur, 824 F.3d 1337, 1339–40 (11th Cir. 2016), that Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a predicate crime of violence under § 924(c)); United States v. … “[T]he standard of proof is high,” and the facts must “positively, unequivocally and clearly generate [a] legitimate doubt [regarding the defendant’s competency].” Card v.