September 2014 RSS feed for this section

Eleventh Circuit Rejects Federal Prisoner’s Request to Raise New Arguments Unrelated to Errors Corrected at Resentencing on a Direct Appeal of the Resentencing

In United States v. Haynes, Nos. 12-12689 & 12-13244 (Aug. 22, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit declined to vacate a federal prisoner’s sentences based on errors that the prisoner invited the district court to ignore and that are wholly unrelated to the error corrected during resentencing. In two separate trials, Ricky Douglas Haynes, Jr., a federal […]

Read more

Eleventh Circuit Decides Raise in City Firefighters’ Pension Contribution Rate Is Not an Impairment of Contractual Rights

The issue presented in Taylor v. City of Gadsden, No. 13-13885 (11th Cir. Sep. 16, 2014) was whether the City of Gadsden, Alabama’s decision to raise its city firefighters’ rate of contribution to Gadsden’s employee pension program impaired the firefighters’ contractual rights under the U.S. Constitution and the Alabama Constitution. Throughout the 2000s, Gadsden’s employee […]

Read more

Eleventh Circuit Affirms LLC Constitutes a “Corporation” for Federal Mine Safety and Health Act

In Sumpter v. Secretary of Labor, No. 13-15360 (Aug. 15, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit held that the word “corporation” in the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (“Mine Act”) includes Limited Liability Companies (LLCs).  Section 110(c ), of the Mine Act states that “[w]henever a corporate operator violates a mandatory health or safety […]

Read more

Pro Se Plaintiff Alleging Officers “Slammed” His Head on Pavement Stated Valid Fourth Amendment Claim, Foreclosed Qualified Immunity Defense

In Saunders v. Duke, No. 12-11401 (Sept. 8, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit reversed a dismissal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, and held that a pro se plaintiff stated a valid Fourth Amendment claim for excessive force by alleging that officers “slammed” his head onto hot pavement with “extreme […]

Read more

Rivas v. U.S. Attorney General

In Rivas v. U.S. Attorney General, No. 13-13069 (Sep. 3, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit considered whether a deportable alien, after leaving and reentering the United States, could acquire nun pro tunc a stand-alone waiver of inadmissibility.  The Court determined that the Board of Immigrations Appeals (the “Board”) correctly held Rivas ineligible for a waiver of […]

Read more

Eleventh Circuit Respects State Court Litigation by Refusing to Apply a Broad Interpretation of the Relitigation Exception Under the Anti-Injunction Act

In SFM Holdings, Ltd. v. Banc of America Securities, LLC, No. 9:06-cv-80652-KLR (11th Cir. Sept. 4, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit upheld the district court’s injunction barring relitigation of three of the plaintiff’s contract claims and its finding that since these claims had already been litigated in a prior federal proceeding under the exact same facts […]

Read more

Gaksakuman v. U.S. Att’y Gen.

In Gaksakuman v. U.S. Att’y Gen., No. 13-12893 (Sep. 18, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit considered whether affirmative evidence produced by an alien of the torture of asylum seekers upon return to the alien’s home country may be rebutted by the Department of State remaining silent on the issue in their Country Reports on Human Rights.  […]

Read more

Eleventh Circuit Holds Motion for Reduced Sentence Properly Denied When Factual Findings Place Defendant Within Sentencing Range

In United States v. Darrell Green, No. 12-12952 (Sept. 4, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit yielded to the district court’s findings of fact and held that Defendant’s second motion to reduce sentencing was properly denied because amendments  to the United States Sentencing Guidelines did not alter the sentencing range within which he was placed according to […]

Read more

Eleventh Circuit Vacates Judgment as a Matter of Law Based on Inconsistent Jury Verdicts

In Connelly v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, No. 13-14032 (Sept. 4, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit held that the “district court erred when it entered a judgment as a matter of law based on inconsistent jury verdicts.”  Additionally, the Court affirmed a summary judgment against the plaintiff’s claim of discrimination against his supervisor. Darryl Connelly, […]

Read more

Eleventh Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment Against Plaintiffs in Products Liability Action Where Plaintiffs’ Expert Witnesses Failed Daubert Standard, Could Not Provide Alternative Expert-Witness on Causation

In Chapman v. Procter & Gamble Distributing, LLC, No. 12-14502 (11th Cir. Sept. 11, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit held that summary judgment was properly granted to the defendants in a products liability case. The plaintiffs could not show general and specific causation through expert testimony that would be admissible at trial due to deficiencies in […]

Read more