10 results for 'judge:"Tjoflat"'.
J. Tjoflat finds that the district court properly granted the county officials' motion to dismiss a civil rights action brought by the individual alleging that the county's tax deed sale of his homestead property for an impermissibly low amount was an unlawful taking of the potential surplus the individual could have received from the sale after his back taxes were deducted. The district court correctly dismissed the action on comity grounds because the relief sought by the individual risks disrupting the administration of the state's ad valorem property tax scheme. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: September 17, 2024, Case #: 22-13159, Categories: Civil Rights, Property, Tax
J. Tjoflat finds that the district court improperly granted the companies' motions to dismiss an action brought by the relators alleging that the companies violated the False Claims Act by bidding on government contracts and submitting claims under the contracts without notifying the Small Business Administration to seek a waiver under Minority Small Business and Capital Ownership Development Program regulations. Although the relators' firm grew and graduated from the program before it was taken over by the companies, the firm was still a participant in the program. The relators plausibly established their false presentment and false statement claims and sufficiently pleaded the existence of a conspiracy between the companies to seize ownership and control of the firm. Reversed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: July 25, 2024, Case #: 23-10600, Categories: False Claims
J. Tjoflat finds that the nursing facility residents waived their right to challenge most of the district court's reasons for dismissing their RICO class action accusing the marketing company and the owner of the facility of being improperly licensed and improperly collecting payments from residents or reimbursements from Medicaid and Medicare. The residents waived any objections to the Magistrate Judge's reasoning in her Report and Recommendations about "Colorado River" abstention. The case is remanded with instructions to stay the residents' claims under the "Colorado River" abstention doctrine. Vacated in part.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: June 28, 2024, Case #: 22-11951, Categories: Class Action, Racketeering
J. Tjoflat finds that the district court improperly entered an order approving the proposed $35 million settlement agreement, certifying the class and granting attorney fees up to $10.5 million in a class action alleging that GoDaddy violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by using an automatic telephone dialing system to make calls and send texts to consumers' phones. The district court failed to apply the latest version of the amended procedural rule in finding that the proposed settlement was fair. The district court breached its fiduciary duty because the approved settlement agreement advanced the attorneys' interests over those of the absent class members. Class counsel provided insufficient information to enable the district court to comply with a procedural rule. The district court also applied an incorrect legal standard in calculating the attorney fees. Vacated.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: May 13, 2024, Case #: 21-10199, Categories: Settlements, Consumer Law, Class Action
[Consolidated.] J. Tjoflat finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of the timeshare company in two actions brought by consumers alleging that the company violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by inaccurately reporting that they owed debts. The consumers' claims are not actionable because they cannot identify inaccurate or incomplete information provided by the company to the consumer reporting agencies. The inaccuracies alleged by the consumers stem from a contractual dispute over whether the debt was due and collectible. The information in dispute is therefore not "objectively and readily verifiable." Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: 22-11014, Categories: Consumer Law
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Tjoflat finds that the district court properly sentenced defendant to 94 months in prison for attempted smuggling, failure to notify a common carrier and submitting false or misleading export information. Defendant falsely declared that a shipment to Iraq containing guns was just auto parts. Defendant's convictions did not violate the double jeopardy clause because the three statutes under which he was convicted each penalize different elements. Sufficient evidence was presented to support defendant's convictions and the prosecutor's misstatements or failure to correct testimony about the caliber of the guns did not violate defendant's due process rights. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: April 5, 2024, Case #: 22-12852, Categories: Double Jeopardy, Smuggling, Due Process
J. Tjoflat vacates the original panel opinion and substitutes the instant opinion finding that the district court improperly denied the sheriff's deputy's motion to dismiss a civil rights action brought by the vehicle passenger. The action arose from the passenger's arrest for resisting an officer without violence after he refused to give the deputy his ID when the vehicle was pulled over. The district court incorrectly found that the deputy lacked a valid basis to require the passenger to provide ID. The deputy is entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established law that an officer cannot ask a passenger to identify himself unless the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the passenger poses a risk to his safety. Reversed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: January 30, 2024, Case #: 21-10670, Categories: Civil Rights, Immunity
J. Tjoflat finds that the district court properly upheld the Social Security Administrator's denial of the individual's claim for disability insurance benefits. Although an administrative law judge was not constitutionally appointed when the first opinion in the individual's case was issued, that decision was vacated on the merits by the district court and the second decision was issued by a properly appointed judge. There is therefore no live Appointments Clause violation at issue. There was good cause to discount a medical opinion from the individual's treating physician because it was inconsistent with medical records. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: January 3, 2024, Case #: 22-11103, Categories: Social Security
J. Tjoflat finds that the district court properly convicted defendants of drug offenses including possession with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine on a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The district court correctly denied defendants' motions to dismiss the indictment for lack of jurisdiction. Cameroon validly waived jurisdiction over defendants' prosecutions. The district court also correctly denied defendant's motion to suppress evidence including evidence of cocaine found on board the vessel and defendant's statement after arriving in the United States. There was reasonable suspicion that the vessel was engaged in illegal activity. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: 21-12702, Categories: Drug Offender, Search, Jurisdiction
J. Tjoflat finds the trial court erred by denying the police officer's motion to dismiss Fourth Amendment claims from a citizen who was arrested for resisting after he refused to identify himself to the officer when the car in which he was a passenger was pulled over because a trailer it was hauling had an obscured tag. Given the tilt of U.S. Supreme Court precedent balancing officer safety and investigative authority with intrusions on drivers’ and passengers’ personal liberty, as well as the scope of the Fourth Amendment, the officer was entitled to qualified immunity and dismissal of the citizen's claims, as the citizen had no established right to refuse to show his ID even though there was a lack of reasonable suspicion he had committed a crime. Reversed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: October 2, 2023, Case #: 20-10670, Categories: Constitution, Police Misconduct