Case law

Wayman Sims v. State of Florida

District Court, S.D. Florida · Aug 17, 2023

Rather, as discussed above, the First District Court of Appeals granted Williams habeas relief 11 This is analogous to the federal rule established in Griffith v. … App. 2019), “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application, of clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”

Easterwood v. Carnival Corporation

District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 23, 2020

Hejzlar’s report clearly satisfies the minimum requirements of reliability. To the extent Plaintiff seeks to challenge any suspected weaknesses in Dr. … Jaques’ experience to establish that he satisfies the requirements of Daubert.5 Mr.

Guantanamera Cigars Company v. SMCI Holding, Inc

District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 20, 2022

“If admissibility could be established merely by the ipse dixit of an admittedly qualified expert, the reliability prong would be, for all practical purposes, subsumed by the qualification prong.” … Patel’s experience is clearly sufficient. Taylor’s experience may or may not be sufficient.

Readon v. United States

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 17, 2024

. § 922(g)(1) 1 The Court clearly stated that Movant had fourteen days from the date the Response was docketed to file a Reply. See ECF No. [4] at 1. … Here, Movant argues he is actually innocent because his Florida drug convictions do not qualify as drug trafficking offenses under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) and, thus, he is innocent of being an armed career criminal.

Guantanamera Cigars Company v. SMCI Holding, Inc

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 7, 2022

As Defendants note in their response, “[a] court should exclude evidence in limine only when it is clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds.” [ECF No. 203 (citing Incardone v. … The Tacogne Court found that the third-party use evidence was not valuable because it did “not qualify as third-party use.”

Roblor Marketing Group, Inc. v. GPS Industries, Inc.

645 F. Supp. 2d 1130 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 6, 2009

At one end of the spectrum are situations where a defendant clearly does business over the Internet. … At one end of the spectrum are situations where a defendant clearly does business over the Internet.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. City of Miami

988 F. Supp. 2d 1343 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 27, 2013

The City argues the 2008 CAFR clearly identified the amounts, sources, and purposes of the transfers, showing the City was merely transferring money between its own accounts. (See Mot. 15). … nevertheless argues section 77b(a) of the Exchange Act states the definitions in the statute are to be used “unless the context otherwise requires,” 15 U.S.C. § 77b(a), and because under the common law municipalities are immune

Grossman

District Court, S.D. Florida · Feb 9, 2026

Feb. 26, 2019) (stating that a district judge “evaluate[s] portions of the R & R not objected to under a clearly erroneous standard of review” (citing Davis v. Apfel, 93 F. Supp. 2d 1313, 1317 (M.D. … Damages After establishing that default judgment should be entered as to Counts III–XI, Magistrate Judge Elfenbein moved on to calculating actual and punitive

World Holdings, LLC v. Federal Republic of Germany

794 F. Supp. 2d 1305 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 5, 2011

In LDA Annex I, Germany stated its intention to establish a procedure to validate foreign bonds: The Federal Government[ 13 ] undertakes to do all in its power in order to establish, on the basis of the German Validation … “[Pjrovisions of the [1953] Treaty, the Validation Law and the related measures clearly satisfy the requirements of due process.”

Kessler v. City of Key West

District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 26, 2024

Rule 56 requires granting summary judgment “after adequate time for discovery and upon motion, against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case … immunity.

Basulto v. Netflix, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Florida · May 2, 2023

As established earlier, I cannot speak to the substance of any investigation done by Netflix. … The answer to this question was clearly provided by the Supreme Court in Hickman.

Bulk Distribution Centers, Inc. v. Monsanto Co.

589 F. Supp. 1437 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jun 19, 1984

The language of the NCP further establishes the need for and extent of government response under CERCLA. … Stepan Chemical Co., 544 F.Supp. 1135 , 1140 n. 4 (E.D.Pa.1982), [t]he legislative history clearly establishes Congress' understanding that it was incorporating a standard of strict liability into CERCLA.

Partners Biomedical Solutions, LLC v. Saltsman

District Court, S.D. Florida · Dec 3, 2021

The Court explicitly found that Evan Saltsman did not qualify as an “Affiliate” under the PBS Operating Agreement. … At the summary judgment stage, they relied on the argument that Evan Saltsman did, in fact, qualify as an “Affiliate” under the PBS Operating Agreement.

McDowell v. Stein

415 B.R. 584 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Jan 20, 2009

A finding of fact is not clearly erroneous unless “this court, after reviewing all the evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” IBT Int’l, Inc. v. N. … Accordingly, in order to qualify under § 523(a)(4), there must be an express or technical trust imposing trustee-like obligations on Appellant, and the court looks to New York state law to determine if those trustee-like

American Federation of State County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 79 v. Scott

857 F. Supp. 2d 1322 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 26, 2012

By thus emphasizing that every new hire will be tested, the EO clearly implies that current employees who apply for promotions or transfers are not exempt from mandatory pre-employment testing. … the present case, the Warth Court further indicated: "There is no question that an association may have standing in its own right to seek judicial relief from injury to itself *1330 and to vindicate whatever rights and immunities

Jasmin v. Florida Department of Corrections

District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 18, 2024

“A decision is ‘contrary to’ clearly established federal law if the state court applied a rule that contradicts governing Supreme Court precedent, or if it reached a different conclusion than the Supreme Court did in a … A state court decision involves an “unreasonable application of clearly established federal law” if prior Supreme Court decisions “clearly require[d] the state court” to reach a different result. Kernan v.

Buress v. City of Miami

District Court, S.D. Florida · Apr 29, 2025

The Court, however, denied Officer Verne’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity and the City of Miami’s motion for summary judgment on Buress’s Monell claim. (Id. at 5-12, 13-15.) … “[R]andom acts or isolated incidents are insufficient to establish a custom or policy.” (Id. (citation omitted).

Rapak v. Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

District Court, S.D. Florida · Nov 21, 2022

Similarly, here, Plaintiff has not established outside duties that constitute a significant part of her job as fast-food manager in order to qualify that job as a composite job. … In those situations, the statutory provision would clearly cause harm. Id. at 1788-89 (emphasis added).

Canes Bar & Grill of S. Fla., Inc. v. Sandbar Bay, LLC

343 F. Supp. 3d 1236 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Sep 29, 2018

A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy not to be granted unless the movant clearly establishes the "burden of persuasion" as to all four elements. Siegel v. … In the Eleventh Circuit, likelihood of confusion is based on the following seven factors: (1) the type of mark, specifically whether the mark qualifies as generic, descriptive, suggestive, or arbitrary; (2) the similarity

Jane Doe (J.K.) v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Florida · Jul 21, 2025

The FAA “generally establishes a strong presumption in favor of arbitration of international commercial disputes.” Industrial Risk Insurers v. M.A.N. … However, the text of the EFAA clearly states that when the statute renders an arbitration agreement unenforceable, it does so “with respect to a case,” not with respect to individual claims. 9 U.S.C. § 402(a); see also