Powers v. Board of Directors of Elmwood Tower

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that separate amendment USCA11 Case: 24-12112 Document: 56-1 Date Filed: 05/26/2026 Page: 8 of 21 8 Opinion of the Court 24-12112 was clarifying
• holding that where a defendant “repeatedly asked the district court” to alter its sentencing calculation and “raise[d] the same issue” on appeal, but “rel[ied] on a different line of precedent,” he nonetheless pre- served the issue
• explaining that a clarifying amendment “changes nothing concerning the legal effect of the guidelines, but merely clarifies what the Commission deems the guidelines to have already meant”
• “Precedent is clear that while an issue can be waived, alternative arguments on an is- sue cannot.”
• “[A]n error cannot be plain unless the issue has been specifically and di- rectly resolved by . . . on point precedent from the Supreme Court or this Court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).