Elizabeth Lee Branch
How Judge Branch rules, drawn from 49 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Branch
Elizabeth Lee Branch is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Branch received a commission on March 19, 2018.
Judge Branch's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Branch's own (checked October 11, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 11, 2026).
How Judge Branch decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a bankruptcy appeal, she considered whether the lack-of-knowledge requirement expressly placed in § 727(d)(1) could also be read into adjacent § 727(d)(2).
“The legal question on appeal boils down to whether a ‘lack-of-knowledge’ requirement that is explicitly contained in one subsection of the bankruptcy statute, 11 U.S.C. § 727(d)(1), can be read into the adjacent subsection of the same statute, 11 U.S.C. § 727(d)(2), thereby barring revocation.”
In Compere v. Nusret Miami, Branch declined to add a recordkeeping requirement to the FLSA regulations when the employees identified no binding authority for reading it into the text.
“Pointing to no binding authority, the Employees ask this Court to ignore the plain text of the regulations and read an additional recordkeeping requirement into the FLSA’s already extensive and burdensome requirements.”
Administrative implementation must remain within the authority Congress granted; an agency may not add substantive conditions that alter the statutory line.
“Agencies have only those powers given to them by Congress, and ‘enabling legislation’ is generally not an ‘open book to which the agency [may] add pages and change the plot line.’”
In Zafirov, the court focused on whether a relator holds a continuing legal position and rejected the Appointments Clause challenge on that threshold ground. It left other Article II challenges for remand.
“Because we conclude that relators do not occupy a continuing position, we hold that relators are not officers of the United States subject to the Appointments Clause.”
Procedural preferences
In Hand’s appeal, she held that changes to Florida’s voting-rights restoration system made the challenge to the former system moot because the court could no longer grant meaningful relief.
“In light of the changes to Florida’s voter re-enfranchisement system since this case began, we no longer have the ability to accord Hand meaningful relief from the former system which he challenged.”
In Flowers’s appeal, she declined to consider a legal issue the appellant had not raised in the district court.
“First, we conclude that Flowers failed to raise this legal issue below, and we decline to consider it for the first time on appeal.”
In Delta, the court required the agency to explain why it used a narrower market analysis and imposed an approval condition it had not imposed in similar cases.
“Because DOT did not treat like cases alike when it held the petitioners and the U.S.-Japan joint venture applicants to different standards for approval, the final order was arbitrary and capricious.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Because we disagree, we affirm.”
“We therefore grant the petition and remand to the BIA to determine the full scope of the IJ's inquiry into voluntariness, as set forth in more detail below.”
“For the following reasons, we affirm the bankruptcy court's decision.”
“We decline to rewrite the statute and thus affirm the district court.”
“For the following reasons, we vacate and remand for further proceedings.”
“Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.”
“We therefore hold that this case is moot.”
“We find that McGroarty's suit is time barred and affirm the district court's dismissal of McGroarty's complaint.”
“Because we agree with the district court that Lucoff expressly consented to receive Navient and SAC's calls, we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment to Navient and SAC.”
“Accordingly, we vacate Garcon’s sentence and remand for resentencing.”
“Accordingly, we affirm the district court's decision to dismiss the Plaintiffs' constitutional claims.”
Draft for Judge Branch with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Branch, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Branch's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace