56 results for 'judge:"Pryor"'.
J. Pryor finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of being a felon in possession of a firearm and sentenced him to 96 months in prison. The arresting officers' testimony supported an enhancement for creating a substantial bodily risk to others, and the lower court reasonably considered defendant's mitigation arguments. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 22-2764, Categories: Firearms, Sentencing
J. Pryor finds that the lower court properly limited the insurer's liability under the underinsured motorist policy's $1 million limit by sums the driver received from other sources. The insurer is entitled to offset the limit by a settlement in a personal-injury lawsuit and a workers' compensation award. Between the sums received from other sources, and the insurer's payment of $672,000, the driver recovered a total of $1 million, thus fulfilling the purpose of underinsured motorist coverage under Illinois law. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: 22-2776, Categories: Insurance, Vehicle, Contract
J. Prior finds that the lower court improperly ruled that a transgender prison sergeant's hostel work environment claim failed because the harassment he suffered was not sufficiently severe. The harassment he faced was frequent, physically threatening and humiliating.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 22-13073, Categories: Employment Discrimination
J. Pryor finds that the district court improperly dismissed the receiver's fraud, fraudulent transfers and negligence action against the brokerage and software companies arising from their participation in a Ponzi scheme. The district court incorrectly found that the receiver lacked standing to maintain the fraudulent transfer claims against the brokerage company. The transfers injured the corporate entities used to perpetrate the scheme. However, the receiver lacks standing to maintain common law tort claims against the companies because the receiver failed to allege that the receivership estate was separate and distinct from the Ponzi scheme perpetrators. Reversed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 22-13658, Categories: Fraud
[Consolidated.] J. Pryor finds that the district court properly denied defendants' motions for a new trial after they were convicted of offenses including health care fraud, money laundering and paying kickbacks for operating fraudulent drug rehabilitation clinics. The district court correctly denied defendants' motion to compel discovery of confidential treatment records pertaining to treatment their patients received at other addiction clinics. Defendants cannot show that the records contain impeachment information. Expert testimony from a doctor and lay summary testimony from a certified fraud examiner was properly admitted. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 22-10978, Categories: Fraud, Money Laundering
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. Pryor finds that the bankruptcy court properly ruled in favor of the debtor in his Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition claiming that a retirement account was exempt property of his bankruptcy estate. The creditors sought to garnish funds in the retirement account to satisfy a $1.6 million default judgment entered against the debtor in an action for damages arising from a failed condominium development. The state court's judgment authorizing the bank to remit certain funds to the state court clerk gave it only a limited right to transfer the debtor's funds and did not extinguish the debtor's interest in the funds in the account. The bank failed to exercise its right before the debtor filed for bankruptcy. The lower court's judgment also did not create a right to setoff in favor of the bank. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 22-14113, Categories: Bankruptcy
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly granted the motion by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to dismiss the nonprofit's injunctive relief action arising after the department notified it that activities and payments under five grants would be terminated or withheld due to potential fiscal mismanagement. The department later withdrew the notices, rendering the notices non-final and the case moot. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 22-14057, Categories: Jurisdiction, Injunction
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly dismissed the volunteer golf attendants’ putative class action against the county alleging that the county’s use of their services at a county-owned golf club violated the minimum wage and anti-retaliation provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Florida Minimum Wage Act. The district court correctly found that the attendants were public agency volunteers, not employees. The attendants received reasonable benefits for their services in the form of discounted rounds of golf and were not promised any compensation. The attendants did not have an objectively reasonable expectation of compensation. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: 23-11065, Categories: Class Action, Labor
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the 73-count indictment charging him with unlawful drug dispensing and refusing an inspection of his pharmacy. Defendant, who filled fraudulent opioid prescriptions, was convicted of all but two counts and sentenced to 188 months in prison. The superseding indictment alleged sufficient facts to put defendant on notice of the charges against him. The district court correctly imposed a $200,000 fine and did not commit any error by admitting evidence that defendant's pharmacy came up in other investigations or in excluding an officer's testimony. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: March 6, 2024, Case #: 22-12044, Categories: Drug Offender
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly convicted defendant of three firearm offenses and sentenced him to serve 110 months in prison and pay a $25,000 fine for trying to ship a box of guns and ammunition to the Commonwealth of Dominica. Eleventh Circuit precedent forecloses defendant's challenge claiming the felon-in-possession law violates the Second Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen did not abrogate the precedent. Defendant's prior conviction for trafficking hemp is a controlled substance offense under the sentencing guidelines because Georgia law at the time of that conviction regulated hemp. Sufficient evidence was presented to support the jury's finding that defendant knew the box he tried to ship contained guns. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 22-10829, Categories: Firearms, Sentencing
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of the prison officials and correctly found they are entitled to qualified immunity from the inmate's First Amendment action alleging that the officials retaliated against him for reporting that he was sexually assaulted during a pat-down search. Disciplinary proceedings for lying were initiated against the inmate after an investigator determined the inmate's accusation was unfounded. The officials complied with prison regulations and were acting in the scope of their discretionary authority when they disciplined the inmate for breaking a prison rule against lying. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: February 16, 2024, Case #: 22-11738, Categories: Immunity, First Amendment, Prisoners' Rights
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly ruled the individual was a dealer under the Securities Exchange Act and correctly ordered him to disgorge his profits from a type of "toxic lending" in which he obtained the convertible debt of penny-stock companies, converted the debt into common stock at a discount and sold the stock in high volumes. The individual was an unregistered securities dealer at the time of the transactions. The commission's enforcement action against him did not violate his due process rights. However, the district court incorrectly banned the individual from participating in future penny-stock offerings. The individual gave sincere assurances against future securities law violations and his conduct was not egregious. Affirmed in part.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: 21-13755, Categories: Securities
J. Pryor vacates the original panel opinion in this case and substitutes the instant opinion denying the immigrant's petition for review of the decision to remove him to Jamaica after he was convicted of aggravated felonies. The immigrant was brought to the United States by his father, who is a naturalized citizen, and was admitted as a lawful permanent resident. The immigrant claimed that a provision of a statute disallowing naturalized unmarried fathers from transmitting citizenship to their children violates the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment by discriminating based on race and sex. The immigrant would not have derived citizenship from his father even if the provision treated mothers and fathers the same. The immigrant's mother never naturalized and the mother's maternity was established, therefore the sex classification did not affect the denial of his citizenship claim.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: 22-10416, Categories: Immigration
J. Pryor dismisses the immigrant's petition for review of the decision to remove him to Jamaica after he was convicted of aggravated felonies. The immigrant was brought to the United States by his father, who is a naturalized citizen, and was admitted as a lawful permanent resident. The immigrant lacks standing to assert his claim that a provision of the statute disallowing naturalized unmarried fathers from transmitting citizenship to their children violates the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment by discriminating based on race and sex. The immigrant would not have derived citizenship from his father even if the provision treated mothers and fathers the same.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: January 26, 2024, Case #: 22-10416, Categories: Immigration, Equal Protection
J. Pryor finds that the lower court improperly sentenced defendant for attempted enticement of a minor for sexual activity. The court discussed only the seriousness of his offense and not any of his mitigating arguments. Vacated.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: January 26, 2024, Case #: 22-1400, Categories: Sentencing, Sex Offender
J. Pryor vacates the previous panel opinion and substitutes the instant opinion finding that the district court improperly denied ex-state attorney Andrew Warren's motion for injunctive relief in a civil rights action against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis arising after the governor suspended Warren from office and appointed a political ally to replace him. The suspension occurred after Warren signed transgender healthcare and abortion advocacy statements. The district court incorrectly found that the First Amendment did not protect Warren's signing of the statements. Warren's agreement with a sentence in the abortion statement saying that signatories committed to exercising discretion and refraining from prosecuting people who seek or provide abortions qualified as protected speech. The district court also incorrectly found that the First Amendment did not bar the governor from suspending Warren to gain a political benefit. The case is remanded for the district court to consider whether the governor would have made the same decision based solely on Warren's performance and policies. Vacated.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: 23-10459, Categories: Civil Rights, First Amendment
J. Pryor finds that the district court improperly denied ex-state attorney Andrew Warren's motion for injunctive relief in a civil rights action against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis arising after the governor suspended Warren from office and appointed a political ally to replace him. The suspension occurred after Warren signed transgender healthcare and abortion advocacy statements. The district court incorrectly found that the First Amendment did not protect Warren's signing of the statements. Warren's agreement with a sentence in the abortion statement saying that signatories committed to exercising discretion and refraining from prosecuting people who seek or provide abortions qualified as protected speech. The district court also incorrectly found that the First Amendment did not bar the governor from suspending Warren to gain a political benefit. The case is remanded for the district court to consider whether the governor would have made the same decision based solely on Warren's performance and policies. Vacated.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: January 10, 2024, Case #: 23-10459, Categories: Civil Rights, First Amendment
J. Pryor vacates the original panel opinion and substitutes the instant opinion finding that the district court properly ruled partially in favor of a couple in a breach of contract action against the insurer seeking equitable reformation of an insurance policy due to mutual mistake. The restaurant owner settled the couple's original action arising from injuries the wife suffered from a hot soup spill and assigned the couple its rights under the insurance policy. The policy was in force when the wife suffered her injury. Reformation of the policy is not prejudicial to the insurer. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: January 10, 2024, Case #: 22-13738, Categories: Insurance, Contract
J. Pryor finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of making false statements about his loans to financial institutions and ordered him to pay restitution. Defendant claims that his statements may have misrepresented what he owed, but were not outright lies. However, Seventh Circuit precedent from 2019 establishes that misleading representations are also subject to criminal penalties. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 22-2254, Categories: Fraud, Banking / Lending
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly refused to find in favor of the officer in a civil rights action brought by the brother and spouse arising after their loved one, a white man, was strangled to death by his Black cellmate. The cellmate, who was in jail on aggravated assault charges, told the officer he was inspired to stab a white clerk at a store after watching news reports of white police officers shooting Black men. A reasonable jury could find that the officer violated decedent's rights by doing nothing to isolate the cellmate from white inmates after learning that his prior crime was racially motivated. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: January 5, 2024, Case #: 22-14205, Categories: Civil Rights, Immunity
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly convicted defendants of offenses including distributing methamphetamine and killing a witness. Defendants conspired to give a syringe of lethal drugs to the victim after they discovered she was cooperating with a federal investigation. Although prosecutors failed to provide the required written notice for evidence of a jail detainee's testimony that one defendant solicited him to murder a witness, the error was harmless because defendants had notice of the expected testimony well before trial. The district court did not commit any error in refusing to instruct the jury on spoliation of evidence. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: December 28, 2023, Case #: 22-11373, Categories: Drug Offender, Conspiracy, Witnesses
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly rejected former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows' request to remove his state criminal prosecution to federal court under the federal officer removal statute. Meadows was indicted for conspiring to interfere in the 2020 presidential election. Federal officer removal under the law does not apply to former federal officers. Even if the law applied to former officers, the acts giving rise to his criminal prosecution were not related to Meadows' official duties. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: December 18, 2023, Case #: 23-12958, Categories: Venue
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly dismissed the church's challenge to a decision handed down by the Drug Enforcement Administration denying the church's petition for a religious exemption to the Controlled Substances Act. The church sought to legally use psychedelic ayahuasca tea as part of its religious exercise. The district court correctly found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the church's claims because the DEA's denial was a final decision made under the Act's control and enforcement subchapter. The other claims raised by the church in its complaint were intertwined with the DEA's final decision. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: December 18, 2023, Case #: 22-11072, Categories: Civil Rights
J. Pryor finds that the district court improperly ruled in favor of the employer in a race discrimination action brought by the former employee. The employee, a white woman, alleged that she was unfairly fired for insubordination by her Black manager after complaining about her work schedule while Black co-workers who also complained were not punished. The employee presented sufficient evidence--including evidence that two non-white co-workers engaged in similar conduct by cursing in complaint at the work schedule but were treated differently--to allow a reasonable jury to find that the employer's proffered reason for the employee's termination was a pretext for race discrimination. Reversed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: December 8, 2023, Case #: 22-10057, Categories: Employment Discrimination
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly partially blocked enforcement of a non-compete covenant in an action brought by an ex-employee against his former employer, the auto service company. The district court correctly found that the covenant's geographic restriction preventing the employee from competing within a five-mile radius surrounding more than 1,100 franchised locations was unreasonable under the Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act. However, the district court incorrectly applied the five-year rebuttable presumption of reasonableness rather than the two-year presumption in finding that the covenant's four-year duration was unreasonable under the Act. Affirmed in part.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: December 6, 2023, Case #: 22-10611, Categories: Employment, Contract
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly convicted defendants of conspiracy to distribute and dispense controlled substances not for a legitimate medical purpose and not in the usual course of professional practice. However, one defendant was improperly convicted of distributing controlled substances not for a legitimate medical purpose and outside the usual course of professional practice. Defendants were doctors who participated in a pill mill scheme. The district court's instructions to the jury on the substantive distribution counts against one defendant were improper in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 decision in United States v. Ruan. The district court's error likely affected defendant's substantial rights. Affirmed in part.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: November 29, 2023, Case #: 20-13973, Categories: Drug Offender, Jury Instructions
J. Pryor finds that the lower court properly ruled that a federal prisoner cannot bring a Bivens action alleging that a prison official failed to protect him from violent attacks by his cellmates. The claim presents separation-of-powers concerns and special factors not accounted for by any Supreme Court precedent, so Congress should make this decision not the courts. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 21-2287, Categories: Civil Rights, Prisoners' Rights
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of the deputy and sheriff in a civil rights, conspiracy and malicious prosecution action brought by a driver alleging that he was illegally arrested, detained and prosecuted for driving a methamphetamine trafficker to an undercover drug sting. Although the probable cause affidavit signed by the deputy contained errors, including a misstatement about the amount of drugs involved and an incorrect claim that the meth purchase happened in the driver's car, the deputy is entitled to qualified immunity because probable cause still existed for the driver's arrest as a principal to meth trafficking. The driver furthered the drug trafficking by driving the dealer to the purchase location and stayed for the whole transaction. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 22-12324, Categories: Civil Rights, Malicious Prosecution
J. Pryor finds that the district court improperly denied in part a motion by Florida legislators to quash subpoenas seeking documents related to the drafting and adoption of Florida's Individual Freedom Act, also known as the Stop W.O.K.E. Act. The subpoenas arose from a civil rights action brought by professors and a student challenging the constitutionality of the Act. Legislative privilege shields state legislators from a discovery request related to determining their motives in passing a law. The district court incorrectly found that purely factual documents in the legislators' possession were discoverable since the privilege applies against the discovery of even factual documents. Reversed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: October 30, 2023, Case #: 23-10616, Categories: Privilege
J. Pryor finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of the employer in a race discrimination and retaliation action brought by the former employee. The employee, a Black woman, made several complaints in the months before her termination alleging that she was the target of racial discrimination. The employee failed to create a genuine issue of fact as to whether the employer's reason for firing her based on her bullying and unprofessional behavior was pretextual. The circumstantial evidence presented by the employee does not create a reasonable inference of intentional retaliation against her. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: 22-11129, Categories: Employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation