U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment on all of Dr. Lesley Williams’s federal and state law claims, finding no genuine issue of material fact on her Title IX sex‑discrimination, retaliation, Georgia Whistleblower Act, ADA, Rehabilitation Act, procedural due‑process, and…

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary‑judgment grant of qualified immunity to the officers for the period during which Rafael Cendan was resisting arrest, holding that he failed to demonstrate a clearly established Fourth Amendment right for that phase.

The Eleventh Circuit held that the appeal is moot because the Tennessee district court’s universal vacatur of the challenged provisions of the 2024 HHS Rule eliminated any live controversy, and therefore dismissed the appeal.

The Eleventh Circuit held that the plaintiff’s appeal was timely and the district court lacked jurisdiction to dismiss his complaint with prejudice without first giving him a meaningful opportunity to amend, whether the dismissal was based on shotgun pleading or failure to state a claim.

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the Attorney General’s motion for summary denial, holding that the petitioner failed to exhaust required administrative remedies under INA §242(d)(1) and therefore the court lacked jurisdiction to review the removal order. The court also dismissed the petitioner’s stay request as moot.

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court, holding that the defendant failed to demonstrate an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected his counsel’s performance and that the appeal waiver did not bar his ineffective‑assistance claim, so the court was correct in not sua sponte investigating the…

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary‑judgment rulings, holding that the court applied the correct de novo standard, that physical presence is an essential function of the plaintiff’s speech‑language pathologist position, and that the employer’s actions were not retaliatory under the ADA.

The Eleventh Circuit held that the Russos have standing, that Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council members are unconstitutionally appointed officers because their veto powers give them significant authority, but because those veto powers were not used to adopt the gag grouper rule, the rule is not void and the…

The Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s dismissal with prejudice and remanded for dismissal without prejudice, holding that the order was not a universal injunction, the warning applied beyond the Northern District, the amended complaint did not satisfy Rule 15(a)(1), the court was not required to accept the…

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s 42‑month sentence for illegal reentry, holding that the upward variance was not substantively unreasonable. The court applied a deferential abuse‑of‑discretion standard and found the district court properly weighed all § 3553(a) factors, including deterrence and the…

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Aetna Life Insurance, holding that Aetna’s termination of Judson Pankey’s long‑term disability benefits was not arbitrary or capricious.

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s order remanding the unlawful‑detainer action to Florida state court, holding that the defendant’s pro se removal under 28 U.S.C.

The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s denial of summary judgment and held that Kenny Brinley is entitled to qualified immunity because the Eighth Amendment right alleged by Joshua Hubbert was not clearly established at the time of the injury.

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the Lambous’ third amended complaint, finding it to be an impermissible shotgun pleading that failed to plausibly state a RICO claim, and holding that the appellants abandoned their challenges by not preserving them in their brief.

The Eleventh Circuit vacated the district court’s dismissal of Georgia Atlas’s Due Process and Equal Protection claims, holding that the plaintiffs have Article III standing, and affirmed the dismissal of the Supremacy Clause claim for lack of standing, remanding for further proceedings on the remaining claims.

The court affirmed the Tax Court’s grant of summary judgment upholding the IRS’s rejection of Filipowski’s offer in compromise on public-policy grounds. Although Filipowski identified factual disputes concerning his assets, reporting history, and ability to pay, the court held that the undisputed facts independently…

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment, holding that John Laakso’s sentence‑appeal waiver was made knowingly and voluntarily and therefore enforceable. The court also rejected the argument that the new Supreme Court miscarriage‑of‑justice exception applies to his case.

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's 60‑year sentence for Edward Cordovez, finding the sentence both procedurally and substantively reasonable under the abuse‑of‑discretion standard.

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's revocation of supervised release and 24‑month imprisonment, finding the sentence was not substantively unreasonable and that the court properly considered the relevant sentencing factors.

The Eleventh Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the district court's November 12, 2025 order was not a final decision and was not appealable under the collateral order doctrine.

The Eleventh Circuit granted the government's motion for summary affirmance, finding the appeal frivolous, and affirmed the district court's order denying the plaintiffs' motion to dissolve an anti‑filing injunction.

The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court's order denying a preliminary injunction and recommending remand was neither a final decision under 28 U.S.C. §1291 nor immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine or §1292(a)(1); therefore the court lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal.

The Eleventh Circuit held that 3M satisfied all three prongs of the federal officer removal statute, vacated the district court’s remand order, and remanded the case for further proceedings in federal court.

The court affirmed summary judgment for Parsons on Hunt's False Claims Act claims arising from Parsons's allegedly noncompetitive subcontracting decision and related payment submissions.

The court held that relators pursuing qui tam actions under the False Claims Act are not officers of the United States subject to the Appointments Clause because they do not occupy a continuing position established by law.

The court held that the evidence, viewed favorably to Hall and Hughes, could allow a reasonable jury to find that Coal Bed Services discriminated against them because of race and retaliated against them for complaining about racial discrimination.

The court affirmed Rollins's convictions, holding that he could not invoke attorney-client privilege over communications with counsel for his company, that the district court properly answered the jury's questions, and that sufficient evidence supported the aggravated-identity-theft and PPP-related wire-fraud…

The court affirmed Gary's 84-month sentence, holding that the district court properly applied the two-level reckless-endangerment enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2. Gary's high-speed flight through a residential neighborhood, multiple traffic violations, and disposal of a loaded firearm created a substantial risk of…

The court affirmed the judgment for the minority shareholders on their derivative fiduciary-duty claims. It held that the district court properly admitted the bank-examination documents, correctly instructed the jury, properly rejected the directors' standing challenge based on judicial estoppel, and correctly awarded…

The court affirmed summary judgment for the Georgia Department of Defense on Gary's Title VII and Georgia-law claims. It held that the alleged retaliation did not constitute a materially adverse action, that Gary abandoned any challenge to the timeliness ruling on his harassment claim, and that his…

The court affirmed dismissal of Spivack's second habeas petition for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because his first petition had already been adjudicated on the merits and he had not obtained authorization to file another petition.

The Eleventh Circuit granted summary affirmance and affirmed the dismissal of Tellis’s motion because, regardless of its label, the motion sought relief available only under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

The court affirmed the denial of Hernandez's federal habeas petition. It held that his request for a state-court evidentiary hearing on an unrelated Brady claim did not demonstrate diligence in developing his ineffective-assistance claim, and that the existing record was insufficient to establish entitlement to…

The court dismissed the petition for review because it lacked jurisdiction to review the Board of Immigration Appeals’ refusal to reopen removal proceedings sua sponte. The petitioner’s challenges alleged legal errors in the Board’s discretionary decision, not constitutional violations that could fall within the…

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Emory University on Loye's age-discrimination and retaliation claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Loye waived appellate challenges by failing to object to the magistrate judge's report and by not invoking the narrow civil plain-error exception; even…

The court affirmed summary judgment for the officers on Coleman’s federal malicious-prosecution and First Amendment retaliation claims. The officers had at least arguable probable cause to pursue an obstruction charge because they were investigating possible police impersonation, could request Coleman’s identity…

The court affirmed summary judgment for the United States on Gordon's medical-negligence claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act because Georgia law required expert testimony to establish breach and proximate causation, and Gordon presented none.

The court affirmed Alvarez-Tello's 144-month sentence, holding that the upward variance from the mandatory minimum was substantively reasonable. The district court properly considered the sentencing guidelines, statutory sentencing factors, mitigating evidence, and Alvarez-Tello's post-arrest conduct, and reasonably…

The court affirmed dismissal of the complaint because the judicial defendants were absolutely immune from the requested injunctive relief and Younger abstention applied to the claims against the private defendants.

The court affirmed judgment on the administrative record for LINA, holding that LINA reasonably terminated Dunn’s long-term disability benefits after medical and vocational evidence showed she could perform qualifying sedentary occupations.