Let's put it this way -- if you have 'em, use 'em:
After reviewing the record, reading the parties briefs, and having the benefit of oral argument, we conclude that our court’s recent decision in Evanston Insurance Company v. Design Build Interamerican, Inc., etc. et al., __ F. App’x ___, (No. 12-15466) (11th Cir. Apr. 8, 2014), is persuasive and controls the disposition of this case.2 Like the panel in Evanston, we conclude that the reasoning and holding of Premier Ins. Co. v. Adams, 632 So. 2d 1054, 1056–57 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994), governs our interpretation of the severability and exclusionary provisions of Nautilus’s policy in this case. Accordingly, based on Evanston and Premier, we reverse the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Nautilus and remand this case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.And here's footnote 2:
The opinion in Evanston is unpublished and therefore not binding on this panel but may be considered as persuasive authority. See 11th Cir. R. 36-2.So what are they, exactly?
Who knows, but cite to your heart's content!